Karnataka Lokayuktha Bagalkote District, Bagalkot vs Chandrashekar 2026 INSC 31 - Criminal Case - Disciplinary Proceedings

Note

You can read our notes on this judgment in our Supreme Court Daily Digests. If you are our subscriber, you should get it in our Whatsapp CaseCiter Community at about 9pm on every working day. If you are not our subscriber yet, you can register by clicking here:

Criminal Case - Disciplinary proceedings and criminal prosecution, even on an identical allegation, are parallel proceedings (Para 1) - Exoneration in the departmental proceeding ipso facto would not result in the quashing of the criminal prosecution. (Para 12) [While restoring criminal proceedings, SC observed: we are not convinced that this is a fit case where the criminal proceedings can be quashed on the exoneration of the delinquent employee in a departmental enquiry.]

Disciplinary Proceedings - The enquiry report in disciplinary proceedings is not conclusive of the guilt or otherwise of the delinquent employee, which finding is in the exclusive domain of the disciplinary authority. The enquiry officer is appointed only as a convenient measure to bring on record the allegations against the delinquent employee and the proof thereof and to ensure an opportunity to the delinquent employee to contest and defend the same by cross-examination of the witnesses proffered by the department and even production of further evidence, in defense. The enquiry officer, strictly speaking, merely records the evidence and the finding entered on the basis of the evidence led at the enquiry does not have any bearing on the final decision of the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority takes the ultimate call as to whether to concur with the findings of the enquiry authority or to differ therefrom. On a decision being taken to differ from the findings in the enquiry report as to the guilt of the delinquent employee, if it is in favour of the delinquent employee nothing more needs to be done since the enquiry stands closed exonerating the employee of the charges levelled. If the decision is to concur with the finding of guilt by the Enquiry Officer, then a show-cause is issued with the copy of the Enquiry Report. However, while differing from the finding of exoneration in the enquiry report, necessarily the disciplinary authority will not only have to issue a show-cause against the delinquent employee, with a copy of the Enquiry Report, but the showcause notice also has to specifically bring to attention of the delinquent, the aspects on which the disciplinary authority proposes to differ, based on the facts discovered in the enquiry so as to afford the delinquent employee an opportunity to proffer his defense to the same. (Para 14)

Case Info

Case: The Karnataka Lokayuktha Bagalkote District, Bagalkot vs Chandrashekar & Anr.; Neutral citation: 2026 INSC 31.


Key Details

  • Coram: K. Vinod Chandran, J.; Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.
  • Judgment date: January 06, 2026 (New Delhi).

Caselaws and Citations

  • Radheshyam Kejriwal v. State of W.B., (2011) 3 SCC 581.
  • State (NCT of Delhi) v. Ajay Kumar Tyagi, (2012) 9 SCC 685.
  • National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680.
  • P.S. Rajya v. State of Bihar, (1996) 9 SCC 1.
  • State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.

Statutes/Laws Referred

  • Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984.
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 482 discussed via Bhajan Lal).
  • Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (Sections 51 and 56).
  • Income Tax Act, 1961.
  • Constitutional provisions: Article 20(2) referenced in principles.