News Karnataka
Friday, March 29 2024
Cricket
Bengaluru

After 34 years, will this trial finally end

Photo Credit :

Bengaluru: In a classic case of mockery of criminal justice – here is a case (probably one of the longest ever heard by a lower court) on for the last 34 years, during when the complainant has died, the investigating officer (IO) has died, 8 out of 18 accused in the case including four main accused – accused no.1 (A1), A2, A3 and A5 have died, 24 witnesses have died, but, the charges are yet to be framed!

The case pertaining to Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) dates back to February 1980. Former BDA chairman, B T Somanna and 17 others were booked under Prevention of Corruption Act and various other IPC sections. As the COD (Corps of Detectives) (now CID – Criminal Investigation Department (changed in 2009)) is yet to take a proper sanction against the government officials, on which the defence had taken an objection, the case has gone to a cold storage.
After 34 years of suffering and agony, counsel for 84-year-old A4, B Madhav Rao, who is now paralyzed and bed ridden, has now moved court praying that his case be referred to medical board, which if deems him not to be fit to be part of trial, will end his agony. A petition was filed on 24 November.

34-year trial or sentence?

The case dates back to February 1980 during the chief ministership of former chief minister R Gundu Rao. The government had ordered an inquiry into an alleged misappropriation of funds by officials who were at the helm of affairs in BDA. It was alleged that the officials had carried out expenditure beyond their sanctioned limit. Another charge was purchasing stationary and printing material without calling quotation. An inquiry was ordered into alleged misappropriation of Rs.3 34 715 which is said to have taken place in 1979.

Displaying Eighteen including state government officials and individuals were made accused and COD took up the investigation in the same month. B T Somanna, chairman, BDA was A1, C Rajavelu, then secretary, BDA was A2, B Appaji, assistant controller, who was on a deputation from state accounts department was shown A3, B Madhav Rao, an officer from public works department on deputation to BDA was A4, and Dev Kumar an accounts department officer was A5, K N Prakash was A6, B T Muniyappa, a store keeper was A7, T G Ganesh Naidu a first division assistant, BDA was A8, Jahia Begum another FDA, BDA was A9, G R Sriranga shetty, who was on deputation from state acconts department was shown A10, Muddu Krishna an FDA with BDA was shown A11, A V Doreswamy a finance assistant was shown A12, four individuals Vijaya Sarathi, Vishwa Mitra, N C Mohan Kumar and R M Usha – four private individuals were shown as A13, A14, A15 and A16 respectively besides two other individuals. Ramaswaym, a COD DySP was IO in the case.

All of them were charged under section 13 (1) (d) of PC Act (abuse of power), section 120 (b) (criminal conspiracy), 465 (punishment for forgery), 467 (forgery), 409 (criminal breach of trust), and 420 (cheating).

Subsequently a chargesheet was submitted in 1982. However, in July 1991, the special court (lokayukta court) discharged case on the grounds that the sanction was invalid as though sanction was accorded by the CM, the chief minister had said nothing on the grounds.

COD challenged it in High Court and filed a criminal revision petition in 1993. The High Court which heard the petition upheld the order of the trial court.

The COD sleuths after two years, again filed a fresh case (an old wine in new bottle) and filed charge sheet in 1998 before IV ACMM court (additional chief metropolitan magistrate), dropping P C act sections and citing only IPC sections in order to over come the provision of sanction in a PC act case. However all the accused, allegations and facts of the case remained same.

Immediately, the defence took an objection on two grounds – first, the case can’t be tried as the allegations and the chargesheet were same as it was initially between 1980-1991, when it was discharged. Secondly, the sanction was not obtained even now.

This was the initial trigger for delay. As the charges of corruption came up and with an exclusive court (lokayukta special court) meant for it, the IV ACMM court, in dilemma asked the prosecution and defence to decide further in case.

The lapse
However, COD neither obtained fresh valid sanction to pursue the case in special court (lokayukta court), nor asked the court – IV ACMM court (where the case was heard) and hearing was on to go ahead and frame charges based on IPC sections keeping the ‘sanction’ option open (if in case PC provisions came during evidence stage). As a result, the case went to cold storage with at least 400 hearings till date.

During the trial, all government officials got retired and several of them died. But the case hasn’t moved a bit. The counsel for A4, who is in paralyzed and in ICU have filed an application to the same court last week praying the court to refer his case to medical board.

“As A4 is bed ridden and not in a position to take his defence or can’t decide on the case, we have sought his case be referred to medical board to obtain necessary certificate on whether he is in a position to understand and take up his defence,” C G Sunder, counsel for the Rao told Bangalore Mirror.

The case is now posted to December 10.

“The 34 years of trial has served no purpose. Even if the trial goes on it will serve no purpose as all the main accused who are alleged to have committed crime are dead and major witnesses are no more. Now to trace the addresses of the witnesses or find out who are alive and then go on with the trial for another 10-15 years would not serve any purpose. It is a fit case for the government to exercise it’s power under the code of criminal procedure to withdraw the case to save public time and money,” Sunder added.

Sixty six year old Ganesh Naidu, one of the accused said that they had already undergone punishment for no fault for 34 year and it was high time the government should step in.

“Doesn’t it amount to human rights violation guaranteed under constitution of India, whatever may be the case of delay. Most of the accused and witness have died. We have undergone enough punishment for 34 years. I only hope our government will act and prevent further agony,” Ganesh Naidu told Bangalore Mirror.

Statistics
For a case on alleged misappropriation of Rs.3.34 lakh and instituted suo moto by the state government the logistics spent so far.

Number of judges :
Magistrates at ACMM court : 9 Principal District Sessions Judges : 8 High Court judges : 7

Number of hearings :
With an average of 1 hearing every month, its comes to around 408 in 34 years.

Number of people involved :
30 plus – staff including a judge, 4 court staff, one IO, police personnel, 1 PP, 18 accused, 8 defence counsels.
Money spent : In 34 years, overall expenditure is around Rs.60 lakh and state’s exchequer atleast Rs.10-Rs.15 lakhs

Share this:
MANY DROPS MAKE AN OCEAN
Support NewsKarnataka's quality independent journalism with a small contribution.

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

To get the latest news on WhatsApp