Supreme Court quashes FIR against former Karnataka Deputy CM R Ashoka in alleged land scam

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday quashed an FIR filed against senior Karnataka BJP leader and former deputy chief minister R Ashoka in 2018 in an alleged scam concerning regularisation of unauthorised occupation of lands.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Vipul M Pancholi found absence of sanction and malice in the proceedings initiated against the leader.

"The actions against the appellant ex facie appear to be politically motivated and thereby afflicted by malice, even if delay was kept aside, the prosecution of the appellant could not proceed in the eyes of the law,'' the bench said.  

The bench noted three complaints were filed by the members of the rival political party, Congress while first two were found to be lacking sufficient materials.

"This shows concerted effort on the part of the complainants to cast aspersions on the credibility of the appellant as a public leader, as also impute ill-intention upon him despite having, on earlier occasions failed to do so. These facts can be said to be pointing towards malice when taken together with the fact of time gap,'' the bench said.  

The court allowed the appeal by Ashoka and set aside the Karnataka High Court's judgment of September 25, 2018, which declined to quash the FIR. 

The bench emphasised this court has consistently held that when the State deals with public property, whether by allotment, lease, or otherwise, it must act fairly, reasonably, and in a manner that does not give rise to any semblance of favouritism or extraneous considerations.

''Thus, when the government allots land to those who are economically unfortunate, it acts within the domain of its welfare responsibilities. However, such power is circumscribed by constitutional limitations," the court said. 

The court stressed the State must function as the guardian of the lands vested in it, ensuring that allotments serve the common good, comply with equality norms, and reflect a judicious exercise of public power. 

"Any deviation from these principles would not only undermine the constitutional vision of distributive justice but also expose the impugned action to invalidation on the ground of arbitrariness,'' the bench said.  

The appellant was an elected member of the legislative assembly in Karnataka. Between 1998 and 2007, he was Chairman of the Committee for regularisation of unauthorised occupation. The members thereof were the Tahsildar as the Secretary and three other persons. 

It was alleged that under the Chairmanship of the appellant, the land that was originally meant to be allotted to economically downtrodden persons and those below the poverty line as also the Scheduled Caste, was allotted to the members of his family/followers/members of the City Corporation etc.

The court heard senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Sajan Poovayya,

Mr Gaurav Agraval, for the appellant, and P B Suresh, Harin P Rawal, and Karnataka's AAG Aman Pawar, and advocates Abhishek Bharti and Balaji Srinivasan.

The court further noted the first complaint was made five years after the end of the period in 2007 on September 5, which was closed in November of that year. Reopening was ordered, investigated and the complaint was again closed in the year 2014. At the end of 2017, a fresh complaint was filed on which no action has been taken. And in 2018, the subject complaint came to be filed i.e. , almost 11 years after.

"Why was the first complaint filed after five years, and why did the complainant maintain silence from 2014 to 2017 when the second complaint was filed, was unexplained," the bench said.

The court also held the submission of the appellant that the absence of a sanction vitiated proceedings against him, is liable to be accepted.