- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2714 OF 2020 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI NANJUNDEGOWDA N AGED 69 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKANANJAPPA, R/O NO 143/144, 1ST CROSS, CENTRAL EXCISE LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGARA, BENGALURU 560040, BENGALURU DISTRICT (SR. CITIZENSHIP NOT CLIAMED) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA POLICE, BANGALORE REP BY ITS SPP, KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA, M S BLDGS, BENGALURU 560001, BENGALURU DISTRICT 2. SRI JAGADEESHA B N AGED 35 YEARS, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, ADVOCATE, JAGADEESH AND HARISH ASSOCIATES, NO 3/14, 2ND FLOOR, Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 DBS GURUSIDDAPPA AND SONS BUILDING, 4TH MAIN, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU 560009 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VENKATESH.S.ARABATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 SERVED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN CR.NO.69/2012 ON THE FILE OF XXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE FOR PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, BENGALURU IN P.C.R.NO.41/2012 (LATER NUMBERED AS SPL.C.C.NO.315/2016) FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 13(1)(c),13(1)(d) R/W 13(2) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT AND SECTION 120(B) AND 420 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER Petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.4 has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in Spl.C.C.No.315/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 13 (1) (c) and 13 (1)(d) r/w 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 Section 120-B and 420 of IPC, arising out of Cr.No.69/2012 of Lokayukta Police. 2. In support of the petition, the petitioner has contented that his case is covered by the decision of Co- ordinate Bench of the Court in WP.No.41103/2016 c/w W.P.No.5130/2016 and W.P.No.6224/2016, wherein the Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against some of the other accused involved in the same case. Admittedly charge sheet came to be filed against 28 RTO officials. Except five remaining officials were not in service. The concerned police sought sanction to prosecute them. However, the Government Vide order dated 19.09.2016 refused to sanction for prosecution on the ground that out of the 5, 2 have already retired and with regard to the 3 serving officers, the Government is of the opinion that it is not a case for granting sanction. When the prosecution of 5 serving officers was not sanctioned, the same benefit shall also be available to those officers who have already retired. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 3. Section 8-A of Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act 1957 provides for collection of tax escaping payment from the owner of the vehicle, after notice and after having been given an opportunity of being heard. Further, if there are any arrears/escaped payment/difference of tax due on motor vehicle, the same could be recovered by invoking the provisions of Section 11 Taxation Act, by seizing and detaining the motor vehicle and thereafter auctioning such vehicle by following the procedure laid down under the Rule 27-B of the Taxation Rules. 4. Simultaneously, such cases could be referred to the revenue authorities to recover the same as area of land revenue as provided under Section 13 of the Taxation Act. Further, as provided under Section 21 of the Taxation Act, no suit or prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything done in good faith or intended to be done. Further, no time limit is prescribed either under the Taxation Act or the Rules framed there - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 under to recover the areas of tax from the owners of the vehicles. Wrong assessment of the tax cannot be construed as criminal misconduct and no motive could be attributed. 5. The two incidents alleged against the petitioner dated 03.08.2000 and 25.07.2000 are more than 4 year old. As per Rule 214 (3) of KCSR, no judicial proceedings, if not instituted, while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement, or during his re- employment, shall be instituted in respect of a cause of action, which arose or in respect of an event, which took place, more than four years before such institution. In the light of the same, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and hence the petition. 6. On the other hand, it is submitted on behalf of the respondent that one Jagadeesha B.N, filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C against unknown vehicle dealers, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 owners and others, alleging that in various RTO offices in Bengaluru, Karnataka, several corrupted malpractices are going on in the matter of registration of imported vehicles and thereby causing loss to the Government in Crores of rupees. The Special Court referred it to Superintendent of Police, Karnataka Lokayukta. It was registered in Cr.No.69/2012, for the offences punishable under Sections 8 and 12 of PC Act. 7. After conducting detailed investigation, charge sheet came to be filed against the accused persons named therein including the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(c), 13 (1)(d) r/w 13 (2) of PC Act and Sections 120-B and 420 IPC. After taking cognizance, the Special Court issued summons against the accused persons, including the petitioner, which is being challenged in this petition. There is prima facie material to proceed against the accused persons, including the petitioner and pray to dismiss the petition. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 8. Heard arguments and perused the record. 9. The specific allegations made in the charge sheet are that the vehicle dealers, middlemen, smuggler across the Country and owners of imported vehicles at Mangaluru, have colluded with the RTO officials, customs, department, and mediators. They and the other officers have managed to get the motor vehicles registered by paying lesser amount of tax and thereby they have cheated the Government by causing loss of Rs.2,80,696/-. 10. In W.P.No.41103/2016 c/w Crl.P.No.5130/2016 and W.P.No.6224/2016, filed by some of the accused came to be allowed by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Court by holding that the incidences in respect of which complaint came to be filed was from the year 2003 to 2006. The complaint came to be filed on 06.08.2012 and the FIR was registered on 14.08.2012. Out of 20 accused, officers of the Revenue Department, except 5 rest of them have retired. Out of the 5 by the time, the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 matter came before the Government for sanction 2 also retired. The State Government refused to grant sanctioned so far as 3 officials are concerned. 11. Main reasons assigned by the Government for refusing sanction was that if there is any short collection of tax, under Section 8-A of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, difference amount could be collected. In fact, already owners of the vehicles were called upon to pay the difference amount and the same has been paid by them. Some of the accused persons were already given the benefit of the order passed by the Government. Consequently, the above criminal petitions came to be allowed quashing the criminal proceedings. 12. The present petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.4 has retired from service on 31.01.2011. It is submitted that already the balance tax is collected. In the light of the same this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of the criminal proceedings would - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 amount to abuse of the process of the Court and petitioner is also entitled for the same benefit given to the other accused. 13. In the result, the petition succeeds and accordingly the following: ORDER (i) Petition filed by the Petitioner/accused number 4 under Section 482 Cr.P.C is allowed. (ii) The Criminal proceeding in Spl.C.C.No.315/2016 (arising out of Cr.No.69/2012) on the file of XXIII Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for Prevention of Corruption Act, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) r/w Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 120-B and 420 of IPC is hereby quashed. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31038 CRL.P No. 2714 of 2020 (iii) The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court through email. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30