“The spectre of corruption once raised, on the basis of material placed on record, cannot be summarily extinguished at the threshold,” stated Justice M Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court, emphasizing the gravity of the allegations against IAS officer Rohini Sindhuri. This statement came as the court directed the state government to grant approval for the prosecution of Sindhuri in connection with a controversial procurement case involving eco-friendly bags.
Rohini Sindhuri, who served as the deputy commissioner of Mysuru and was also the Managing Director of the Karnataka Handloom Development Corporation during the period in question, is accused of causing a substantial financial loss to the state. The complaint, filed by NR Ravinchandre Gowda, a lawyer and social activist from Mysuru, alleges that the state incurred a loss of Rs 7.5 crore due to the inflated purchase price of eco-friendly bags in 2021. The bags were procured at Rs 52 each, while the market price stood at just Rs 13.
The case has drawn significant attention, not only for the alleged financial misconduct but also for the implications it has on governance and accountability within the Indian administrative system. The Karnataka High Court’s ruling highlights the necessity for a thorough investigation into corruption allegations, which cannot simply be dismissed without proper inquiry. Justice M Nagaprasanna reiterated that “Departmental proceedings and criminal prosecution operate in distinct spheres, governed by distinct standards of proof and objectives.”
Initially, the state government had declined to grant permission for prosecution under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which aims to protect public servants from frivolous complaints. However, the court criticized this decision, stating that “Section 17A should not be used to block serious investigations; it is only meant to stop false complaints.” This ruling underscores the court’s commitment to ensuring that serious allegations are not swept under the rug.
In a further clarification, Justice M Nagaprasanna pointed out that conflating departmental inquiries with criminal investigations would undermine the integrity of both processes. “To hold otherwise, would be to conflate two distinct legal regimes – crime and a departmental enquiry, each governed by its own objectives, standards, and evidentiary thresholds,” he remarked. This distinction is crucial in maintaining the rule of law and ensuring that accountability mechanisms are effectively enforced.
The procurement case involves the purchase of over 14 lakh eco-friendly cloth bags, which were intended to promote sustainable practices within the state. However, the allegations of inflated pricing have raised questions about the decision-making processes and oversight mechanisms in place at the time of the procurement. The Anti-Corruption Bureau is expected to take further steps in light of the court’s directive, which includes filing an FIR against Sindhuri.
Rohini Sindhuri, a senior IAS officer from the 2009 batch of the Karnataka cadre, has been a prominent figure in the administrative landscape of Karnataka. Her recent publicized feud with IPS officer D. Roopa in 2023 had already placed her in the spotlight, but these new allegations could significantly impact her career and reputation.
As the situation unfolds, the focus will be on how the Karnataka government responds to the court’s directive and the subsequent actions taken by the Anti-Corruption Bureau. The legal proceedings against Rohini Sindhuri are likely to attract considerable public and media attention, reflecting broader concerns about corruption and accountability within the Indian bureaucracy.
