Supreme Court stays proceedings against B S Yediyurappa in graft case | India News,The Indian Express
Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Siddharth Dave contended that prior sanction from the authority was required for inquiry with respect to acts by public servants in discharge of official functions or duties.
Friday, Sep 23, 2022
ePaper
Today’s Paper
Journalism of Courage
HomeExplainedPolitical PulseIndiaCitiesOpinionEntertainmentLifestyleTechnologyVideosSportsAudioEducationPremiumInvestigations
Subscribe
Sign In
TrendingCrossword & SudokuUPSC KeyEveryday ExplainersHealth SpecialsAcademic CounsellingFollow AuthorsCricket
if (window.innerWidth) //if browser supports window.innerWidth
var page_w=window.innerWidth;
else if (document.all) //else if browser supports document.all (IE 4+)
var page_w=document.body.clientWidth;
//var page_w=screen.width;
if( page_w > 1024 ) {
jQuery(".add-left,.add-right").show();
}else{
jQuery(".add-left,.add-right").hide();
}
HomeIndiaSupreme Court stays proceedings against B S Yediyurappa in graft case
Supreme Court stays proceedings against B S Yediyurappa in graft case
Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Siddharth Dave contended that prior sanction from the authority was required for inquiry with respect to acts by public servants in discharge of official functions or duties.
By: Express News Service
/// Story Page Editor Details ////
jQuery(".bulletProj").hover(function() {
var dividshow = '#div_'+jQuery( this ).attr( 'id' );
jQuery( this ).siblings("#div_written_by_parent").html( jQuery( dividshow ).html() ).show();
})
jQuery(".editor-details, .editor").hover(function () {},function () {
var dividhide = '#'+jQuery( this ).attr( 'id' );
jQuery( "#div_written_by_parent" ).html("");
jQuery( "#div_written_by_parent" ).hide();
});
New Delhi | September 23, 2022 7:43:44 pm
Former Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa. (File)The Supreme Court on Friday stayed the proceedings in an FIR lodged by Lokayukta against former Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa on charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and Hima Kohli also issued notice to complainant T J Abraham on Yediyurappa’s appeal challenging the High Court order restoring the complaint against him.
Appearing for Yediyurappa, Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Siddharth Dave contended that prior sanction from the authority was required for inquiry with respect to acts by public servants in discharge of official functions or duties.
In this regard, the counsel referred to the October 2013 ruling of the Supreme Court in the Anil Kumar vs Aiyyappa case wherein it was laid down that a Magistrate cannot order investigation against a public servant on a corruption complaint without sanction from the government.
The counsel for the respondent contended that the case fell in a different category and as such the question of sanction would only arise at a subsequent stage. Rohatgi pointed out that the Governor had rejected the request for sanction.
Rating: 5