The Supreme Court mentioned a larger bench on Monday, with a special leave petition filed by former Karnataka chief minister and BJP leader BS Yediyurappa challenging the revival of his corruption case.
Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra explained that one of the main legal issues involved by Mr. Yediyurappa is the approval of the appropriate authorization of Section 17A of the Corruption Act under Section 17A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CRPC) (CRPC).
Justice Padivara said during the study that he and Justice Misla encountered the fact that the coordinating judge of the Supreme Court (the bench of another judge) filed a different case in 2018, bringing the same legal issue to a larger legal issue. Even now, the reference is still being tried in the Supreme Court.
In a petition filed by Mr Yediyurappa (Manju Surana vs. Sunil Arora & Ors), the bench said judicial discipline requires them not to make a judgment, but please leave it to a larger bench.
“To maintain judicial discipline, the coordinating seat of this court avoids further decisions to determine the basic question, which refers to the larger benchmark. We believe that these petitions are marked as marking these petitions and with the recommended matters Manju Surana vs. Sunil Arora & Ors. Registration measures should place these registration measures before the Chief Justice Judge of India for order order.
The case against Mr Yediyurappa is based on a complaint by Alam Pasha, who accused the former chief minister of conspiring with others to revoke the approval of the 26 acres of land granted by the Senior License Committee in the Devanahalli Industrial Zone in the rural area of ​​Bangladesh. Mr Pasha’s case is that the so-called government land for industrial development has greatly lost public finances.
Mr. Yediyurappa served as Chief Minister from 2008 to 2011 when these incidents occurred. Lokayukta police investigated the complaint and conducted FIR registration under the Indian Penal Code and the Corruption Prevention Act. The local court made an understanding of the fee schedule in 2013. However, Mr Yediyurappa has cancelled the FIR and outcome lawsuit with the Karnataka High Court.
The BJP leader successfully argued in the High Court that the District Judge should not admit approval under section 156(3) of the CRPC without the proper authorization of Section 17A.
Mr. Yediyurappa won the High Court case in 2013 on the Supreme Court case law, Anil Kumar vs. Mk Aiyappa. The upcoming reference in the Manju Surana case involves the correctness of the law announced in the AIYAPPA case.
Mr. Pasha waited for two months after the High Court ruling to file a second complaint containing the same charges against the former Chief Minister.
This time, he argued that Mr Yediyurappa had ceased to hold public office and prosecuted him without prior sanctions. The trial court dismissed the complaint due to lack of sanctions, but the High Court favored Mr. Pasha.
The High Court further corrected the corruption case against the BJP leaders in 2021. This forced Mr. Yediyurappa to contact the Supreme Court.
publishing – April 21, 2025 at 09:02 pm IST
