The Karnataka High Court rejected a Petition filed by BJP MLA Munirathna challenging the constitution of SIT to investigate criminal cases registered against him involving allegations of rape, demand of bribe and hurling of casteist abuses.

The petitioner/accused approached the High Court, challenging the registration of a criminal case registered under Sections 504, 506, 323, 385, 420 and 37 of the IPC and pending before the XLII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) and Special Court for cases against MPs & MLAs.

The Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna said, “I find no merit in the submission as, on and from 12-01-2024, CID is declared to be the police station. The said ground also tumbles down. In all, the petition is meritless.”

Senior Advocate Ashok Haranahalli represented the Petitioner, while Additional AG Pradeep C.S. represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

A complaint came to be registered alleging that the petitioner had demanded money from the informant to carry on his garbage disposal work, as he was a contractor who had been entrusted the contract under the Solid Waste Management Tender of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). On the same day, another case was registered alleging the hurling of abuses by the petitioner, taking the caste of the informant therein to his friend. The third case was registered against the petitioner on the allegation that the informant therein was allegedly raped half a decade ago.

Since these crimes had emerged against the petitioner by different informants for different offences, the State constituted a Special Investigation Team (‘SIT’) of the Criminal Investigation Department (‘CID’). In furtherance whereof, a notification was issued directing all criminal proceedings registered against the petitioner be investigated by the SIT.

Arguments

It was the case of the Petitioner that the complaint is a product of political conspiracy against the petitioner. It was contended that the events narrated in the complaint were about five years old and were deliberately registered in the year 2024 to wreak vengeance against the petitioner. It was contended that all the investigations undertaken are contrary to law.

Reasoning

On a perusal of the complaint, the Bench noticed that the demand for money began on July 5, 2019. Every paragraph was indicative of the years of allegations against the petitioner. It commenced in 2019 and stopped in the year 2024. This formed the fulcrum of the lis. “Therefore, it is not the case where the incident of 05-07-2019 alone is complained of on 13-09-2024. The offence continued for five years. Being allegedly fed up of the torture, the complainant/informant comes forward to register the crime. Therefore, the investigation is not hit by delay. Thus, falls the first ground urged by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner”, the Bench said.

Next came the issue regarding the constitution of SIT. The Bench explained that SIT can be constituted to a crime of officers drawn from different Departments. “Merely because the Government order refers to a SIT of the CID it does not mean that it gets vitiated on account of other teammates in the SIT being drawn from other sources. The Head of the investigation team is from CID is an admitted fact. The others would be to assist the head. Therefore, the submission that there is a flaw in the constitution of SIT, is itself a flawed submission and sans countenance”, it added.

The Bench also rejected the contention that the SIT is directed to furnish its report to the Government and not before a Court of law, therefore, it is vitiated. Reference was made to the judgment in Ideya Vendan v. The State Of Karnataka (2013) wherein it has been observed that the merely because an order constituting SIT of the CID and directing submission of the report to the Government would not mean that it would get vitiated. The Bench further placed reliance upon a Notification of the State declaring the CID to be a police station.

“In the light of the judgment and the notification supra the second submission that the Government order runs contrary to law is unacceptable. I find no merit in the submission as, on and from 12-01-2024, CID is declared to be the police station. The said ground also tumbles down”, it said.

Thus, finding the Petition to be meritless, the Bench dismissed the Petition.

Cause Title: Sri Munirathna v. State Of Karnataka (Case No.: CRIMINAL PETITION No.1724 OF 2025)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Sr. Advocate Ashok Haranahalli, Advocate Srinivas Rao

Respondent: Additional AG Pradeep C.S., Addl. SPP Jagadeesha B.N.

Click here to read/download Order





Kerala High CourtJustice M Nagaprasanna

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.