New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice on a petition filed by IAS officer Rohini Sindhuri (IAS:2009:KN) challenging the Karnataka High Court’s direction to the State Government to grant sanction for a preliminary investigation under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act in the alleged eco-friendly cloth bag procurement case.
A Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu sought responses from the Karnataka Government and the original complainant. Significantly, the State Government informed the apex court that it is also opposing the High Court’s order directing it to accord sanction for investigation.
State Also Opposes High Court Direction
Appearing for Rohini Sindhuri, Senior Advocate K. Parmeshwar argued that the Karnataka Government had earlier refused sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act after a departmental inquiry found no wrongdoing on the officer’s part.
He contended that despite the State’s decision, the Karnataka High Court virtually granted sanction by directing the government to approve a preliminary investigation, effectively overriding the executive’s discretion under the law.
Responding to the submission, counsel representing the Karnataka Government informed the Supreme Court that the State itself is challenging the High Court’s direction.
Taking note of the submissions, the apex court issued notices to the respondents and sought their replies.
What the Karnataka High Court Had Held
The controversy stems from an order passed by Justice M. Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court on April 1, 2026.
While hearing a writ petition filed by Ravichandra Gowda, the High Court directed the State Government to accord sanction for a preliminary investigation within four weeks.
The High Court observed that departmental exoneration could not be used by the State as a shield to prevent even the threshold scrutiny of criminal allegations.
According to the court, the absence of disciplinary findings against an officer does not automatically bar a criminal investigation where allegations disclose a prima facie case requiring examination.
Allegations Relate to Cloth Bag Procurement
The allegations relate to IAS Sindhuri’s tenure as Deputy Commissioner of Mysuru in 2021.
According to the complainant, the district administration procured eco-friendly cloth bags at approximately ₹52 per bag, whereas similar bags were allegedly available in the retail market for around ₹13 each.
The complainant alleged that the procurement decision caused an estimated loss of nearly ₹7.6 crore to the state exchequer.
The procurement formed part of the Mysuru administration’s initiative to curb plastic usage by banning plastic carry bags and distributing reusable eco-friendly cloth bags to residents.
Officer Relies on Departmental Clean Chit
Before the Supreme Court, Ms Sindhuri’s counsel maintained that the State Government had already examined the allegations through a departmental process and declined sanction for investigation after finding no misconduct on her part.
The petition argues that the High Court’s direction effectively bypassed the statutory requirement under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which requires prior approval before investigating decisions taken by public servants in the discharge of their official duties.
Matter to Be Heard Further
With notices now issued, the Supreme Court will examine whether the Karnataka High Court was justified in directing the State Government to grant sanction for a preliminary investigation despite the government’s earlier refusal based on departmental findings.
The case raises important questions regarding the scope of judicial review over decisions relating to sanction under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the relationship between departmental inquiries and criminal investigations.
Read Also: Kerala HC Quashes Clean Chit to ADGP S. Sreejith Over Foreign Trip Without Permission
