The Karnataka High Court has directed the State government to grant approval under the Prevention of Corruption Act to the Lokayukta police to file an FIR against IAS officer Rohini Sindhuri in connection with graft allegations that caused losses to the state exchequer.
A bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna issued the order on March 27, in a petition filed by activist NR Ravichandre Gowda who had complained to the Anti Corruption Bureau alleging that Rohini Sindhuri had approved the purchase of 14,71,458 eco-friendly cloth bags at a cost of Rs 52 a piece when the market rates were Rs 13 per piece.
The procurement was carried out when the IAS officer was serving as Mysuru Deputy Commissioner and Managing Director of the Karnataka Handloom Development Corporation, following her earlier move to ban plastic bags and promote eco-friendly alternatives in 2021. The purchase had allegedly caused a loss of Rs 5.88 crore to the state government.
Despite the complaint, an investigation was not initiated against the IAS officer as the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms’ (DPAR) had rejected the approval under Section 17A on May 26, 2025, after a departmental inquiry.
Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act mandates prior government approval before initiating an inquiry or investigation against a public servant for actions taken in the course of official duties.
Justice Nagaprasanna said that Section 17A was meant to “prevent frivolous harassment not to foreclose accountability,” while observing that the complaint “set out, with clarity and documentary support, an allegation that prime facie discloses abuse of the office and consequential financial loss to the state”.
The court noted that “the spectre of corruption, once raised, cannot be summarily extinguished at the threshold,” adding that Section 17A should not “stifle legitimate inquiry into serious allegations of corruption” and is intended only to prevent frivolous harassment.
“...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,” the court said, according to LiveLaw.
Criticising the government for failing to meaningfully reconsider the matter, the court said a further remand would serve no purpose. Instead, it directed the Chief Secretary to accord approval for registration of an FIR and conduct the investigation within four weeks.