The private complaint filed against NICE alleging irregularities in Bangalore-Mysore Express Highway Project was today referred to the High Court by the Lokayukta court for certain legal clarifications.
Allowing the application filed by complainant T J Abraham, judge N K Sudhindra Rao observed, "...It has become necessary to seek enlightenment to avoid confusion and on how to dispose of the matter".
"Enlightenment on order of reference, scope of cognisance will be of great help to this court in disposing of cases," he stated.
Senior counsel K V Dhananjay representing Abraham had sought that the matter be referred to the Karnataka High Court on six questions of law.
Abraham's private complaint pertains to alleged corruption and illegalities in Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor project, awarded to Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise (NICE) and its sister companies.
Among others, the petitioner pointed out that the Supreme Court had most decisively laid down in numerous cases that when a magistrate/special judge applies his mind to the offences before him for directing a police probe in terms Section 156 (3) of CrPC, he is said to have not taken cognisance of any offence.
The High Court, however, in its judgement in B V Acharya vs Venkateshaiah lays down that mere application of mind by a special judge would amount to taking cognisance of the offences before him.
This apparent contradiction deserves to be settled by the High Court on a reference under Section 395(2) of the CrPC, Abraham stated.
