LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/state-by-deputy-superintendent-of-police-vs-b-t-ramesh-anr-20250714/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

State by Deputy Superintendent of Police vs B.T. Ramesh & Anr.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
14 July 2025
Case No.
Civil Appeal No(s). 9463-9465 of 2025
Result
Partly allowed
Bench
Dipankar Datta, Manmohan
Citation
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 202 : 2025 INSC 840
Acts & Sections
CrPC Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1958 Constitution Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Karnataka Civil Services (Second Amendment)…
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 8 S.C.R. 202 : 2025 INSC 840
Issue for consideration
Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in quashing the criminal proceedings, on the grounds of the chargesheet having been filed more than four years after the date of the alleged incident and lack of sanction; and whether r.214 of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1958 has any application to stifle criminal proceedings for offences punishable under the IPC or the PC Act or any analogous law.
Headnote

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.197, 482 – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1958 – r.214 – Quashing of criminal proceedings – Sanction for prosecution – Application of r.214 to stifle criminal proceedings under IPC or PC Act – Respondent-chief engineer in the government department allegedly abused his official position, thereby causing loss to the public exchequer – FIR lodged for offences punishable under IPC and PC Act – Filing of chargesheet – High Court quashed criminal proceedings against the respondent on the grounds that chargesheet was filed more than four years after the date of the alleged incident and lack of sanction – Correctness:

Held: r.214, by any rule of construction, has no application to suppress pending criminal proceedings in the early stage or for stifling such proceedings after cognisance of offence has been taken for no better reason than that the timelines embodied therein have not been adhered to – High Court quashed the proceedings against the respondent by referring to r.214 which, had no application – Ground that the chargesheet having been filed more than four years after the date of the alleged incident for quashing the proceedings unsustainable – As regards, sanction u/s.197, High Court erred in quashing the proceedings qua the offences under the PC Act as it did not appreciate that s.19 thereof, prior to its amendment in 2018, applied only to public servants who were in office at the time of taking of cognisance of offence – Thus, since the respondent retired in 2012 and the cognisance of the offence was taken, four years after his retirement, he was not entitled to the protection u/s.19 PC Act – Such protection would have been available to him only if cognisance were taken while he was still in service – High Court erred in quashing the proceedings on the first ground that chargesheet having been filed more than four years after the date of the alleged incident, completely; and on the second ground of lack of sanction, partly –Impugned order, quashing the proceedings for the offences punishable u/s.13(1)(c) &(d) rw s.13(2) PC Act set aside – Proceedings against respondent restored and may continue for such offences. [Paras 16-25]

Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1958 – r.214 – Withholding or withdrawing pension for misconduct or negligence – Scope of r.214 – Explained. [Paras 16-17]

Keywords: Quashing · Quashing the criminal proceedings · Public servant · Abused official positions · Sanction · Sanction for prosecution Discharge of official duties · Retired public servants · Lack of sanction · Stifle criminal proceedings · Interpretation of statutes · Rule of construction · Chargesheet · Loss to the public exchequer · Cognisance

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment Dipankar Datta, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The present appeals by the State of Karnataka register a challenge to the common judgment and order dated 5th July, 20221 of the High Court of Karnataka2 in three Writ Petitions3 filed by the 1st respondent – B.T. Ramesh4 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 19735. Vide the impugned order, the three writ petitions were allowed impugned order High Court W.P. No.61305/2016 (GM-RES) c/w W.P. No.61306 of 2016 c/w W.P. No.61307/2016 Ramesh Cr. PC with the consequence that proceed
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →