Karnataka High Court

Chandrakala G K vs Karnataka Lokayukta Police Station on 4 July, 2025

Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar

Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar

                                             -1-
                                                          NC: 2025:KHC:24276
                                                      WP No. 17115 of 2025


                   HC-KAR



                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2025

                                            BEFORE
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 17115 OF 2025 (GM-RES)
                   BETWEEN:

                   CHANDRAKALA G.K.,
                   W/O NINGAPPA G,
                   AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
                   R/AT TALIKATTE,
                   CHITRADURGA DISTRICT,
                   KARNATAKA - 577 539.
                                                               ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SRI. VENKATESH P DALWAI, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA POLICE STATION,
                   BANGALORE CITY - 560 001,
                   M.S.BUILDING,
Digitally signed
by
SHARADAVANI
                   REPRESENTED BY
B
Location: High
                   DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE.
Court of
Karnataka                                                     ...RESPONDENT
                   (BY SRI.K.PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

                                             ***

                          THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
                   THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 528 OF BNSS
                   2023 PRAYING TO (A) DECLARE THAT ARREST OF THE
                   PETITIONER'S   HUSBAND    SRI   NINGAPPA   SAVANT    S/O
                   GUDIYAPPA IS ILLEGAL AND CONTRARY TO ARTICLE 21 AND
                                 -2-
                                             NC: 2025:KHC:24276
                                           WP No. 17115 of 2025


HC-KAR



22   OF   INDIAN   CONSTITUTION       IN   CRIME   NO   28/2025
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE;
(B) CONSEQUENTLY, DIRECT THE RESPONDENT HEREIN TO
RELEASE THE SRI. NINGAPPA SAVANT S/O. GUDIYAPPA FROM
CUSTODY OF RESPONDENT FORTHWITH IN CRIME NO.28/2025
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE B IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE;
(C) A DIRECTION TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST OFFICERS OF THE
RESPONDENT INVOLVED IN THE ARRST OF THE PETITIONER'S
HUSBAND BY HIGHER OFFICEROTHER THAN THE OFFICERS OF
KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE;
(D) ANY OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDER MAY BE PASSED.

     THIS CRL.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN

'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR


                        ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

(A) Declare that arrest of the petitioner's husband Sri. Ningappa Savant S/o Gudiyappa is illegal and contrary to Article 21 and 22 of Indian Constitution in Crime No.28/2025 produced at Annexure-B in the interest of justice;

(B) Consequently, direct the respondent herein to release the Sri. Ningappa Savant S/o. Gudiyappa

NC: 2025:KHC:24276

HC-KAR

from custody of respondent forthwith in Crime No.28/2025 produced at Annexure B in the interest of justice;

(C) A direction to take action against Officers of the respondent involved in the arrest of the petitioner's husband by higher officer other than the officers of Karnataka Lokayukta in the interest of justice;

(D) Any other direction or order may be passed."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

since this Court has already directed release of the

petitioner vide interim order dated 19.06.2025, the said

interim order may be made absolute and the petition may

be disposed of. It is further submitted that in the event

the present petition is disposed of, making the interim

order granted on 19.06.2025 absolute, then the petitioner

would unconditionally withdraw the bail application filed

by him before the Special Court.

3. The submission is placed on record.

4. On 19.06.2025, this Court had passed the

following interim order:

NC: 2025:KHC:24276

HC-KAR

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent - Lokayuktha and perused the material on record.

2. In this petition, petitioner seek declaration that the arrest of her husband Sri.Ningappa G @ Ningappa Sawant by the respondent - Police on 31.05.2025 was illegal and consequently, set aside the impugned remand order dated 03.06.2025 at Annexure-F in Crime No.28/2025 registered by the respondent - Lokayuktha for offences punishable under Sections 7A, 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, pending on the file of XXIII Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Spl.Judge, Bangalore.

3. By way of an interim prayer, petitioner seek directions to the respondent to release her husband on interim bail and for other reliefs.

4. Apart from urging other contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the grounds of arrest of the petitioner's husband had not been communicated, informed or furnished to the petitioner's husband or his relatives including the petitioner herein at the time of his arrest and consequently, the impugned arrest of the petitioner's husband and the impugned order of remand are contrary to the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal vs. Union of

NC: 2025:KHC:24276

HC-KAR

India - (2024) 7 SCC 576; Prabir Purkayastha vs. State (NCT of Delhi) - (2024) 8 SCC 254; Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana - 2025 INSC 162 and Kasireddy Upender Reddy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & others - 2025 INSC 768, inasmuch as the reasons for arrest and the grounds of arrest had not been intimated, informed or communicated to the petitioner's husband and his relatives including the petitioner herein in writing, much less, explained to them in accordance with the principles laid down in the aforesaid judgments and consequently, the impugned arrest and the impugned remand order deserve to be quashed and the petitioner's husband is entitled to be released on interim bail immediately without any further delay.

5. Per contra, learned Addl.SPP for the 1st respondent - State would oppose the submissions made by the petitioner and contended that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. A perusal of the material on record, in particular the impugned arrest of the petitioner's husband and the impugned remand order would prima-facie indicate that the same are contrary to Articles 21, 22(1) and 22(5) of the Constitution of India and Section 50 of the Cr.P.C., as well as the

NC: 2025:KHC:24276

HC-KAR

principles laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgments coupled with the fact that the grounds of arrest were not intimated, furnished or communicated to the petitioner or her husband as required in law and as such, by way of an interim arrangement and without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Arnab Manoranjan Goswami vs. State of Maharastra & others - (2021) 2 SCC 427, I deem it just and appropriate to direct the respondent-

Lokayuktha and the concerned Jail authorities to release the petitioner's husband on interim bail for a period of four weeks from today, subject to the following conditions:

a) The petitioner's husband Sri.Ningappa G @ Ningappa Sawant shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the evidence, witnesses etc., of the respondent;

b) He shall not involve in similar offences in future;

c) He shall co-operate with the investigation, subject to the pending W.P.No.8135/2025;

d) He shall not leave the jurisdiction of this Court without the prior permission of the Court;

e) He shall execute a personal bond for a sum

NC: 2025:KHC:24276

HC-KAR

of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court within a period of two weeks from the date of his release.

f) He shall produce his address / identity proof before the Jail authorities at the time of his release.

g) He shall mark his attendance before the respondent - Lokayuktha police on every Monday between 10.00 a.m. and 06.00 p.m.

h) Liberty is reserved in favour of the prosecution as well as the Trial Court to take appropriate action against the petitioner's husband Sri.Ningappa G @ Ningappa Sawant including cancellation of interim bail, in the event he violates any of the terms and conditions mentioned above.

7. The respondent - Lokayuktha and concerned Jail Authorities are directed to release the petitioner's husband Sri.Ningappa G @ Ningappa Sawant forthwith without any delay and immediately upon a receipt of a copy of this order.

8. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the concerned Jail Authorities forthwith without any delay both electronically and telephonically.

NC: 2025:KHC:24276

HC-KAR

It is made clear that both sides are directed not to speak to the Media of any type, form etc., regarding any of the proceedings before any Court, Forum, Authority etc., Liberty is reserved in favour of respondent to seek vacation / modification of this order. Re-list on 30.06.2025 along with W.P.No.8135/2025.

Hand delivery of this order is permitted."

5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has filed

another petition, challenging the FIR in Crime No.28/2025

in Crl.P.No.8135/2025 which is pending before this Court.

It is also a matter on record that the petitioner has been

released pursuant to the aforesaid interim order passed

by this Court. Under these circumstances, the present

petition deserves to be disposed of making the aforesaid

interim order absolute and reserving liberty in favour of

the parties to urge all their contentions in Criminal

Petition No.8135/2025.

6. Petition is hereby disposed of. The interim

order granted by this Court dated 19.06.2025 is made

absolute. It is needless to state that the terms and

NC: 2025:KHC:24276

HC-KAR