Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail Of IPS Officer In Lokayukta Corruption Case, Says Uniformed Officer "Cannot Claim Parity With A Layman"

The Bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva allowed the appeal filed by the Karnataka Lokayuktha Police, Bangalore District, against the order of the High Court of Karnataka dated September 1, 2025.

Advocate-on-Record Vikram Hegde appeared for the Lokayuktha Police. Senior Advocate Gaurav Aggarwal appeared for the respondent officer.

The Bench placed considerable weight on the respondent's rank and on the nature of the accusation. It said, "The inescapable fact is that the respondent is a member of the uniformed service and is of the rank of no less than the Superintendent of Police. Grave accusations have been levelled against him in the context of his alleged abuse of office within the establishment of the Lokayuktha. As the very objective of the Lokayuktha's establishment is to check corruption, the allegation against the respondent to the effect that he is himself a part of such corruption, warranted serious consideration."

The Court went on to hold that an officer of the respondent's standing could not expect the same treatment as an ordinary citizen when seeking pre-arrest protection: "Being a member of a uniformed service, the respondent cannot claim parity with a layman, who seeks protection from being arraigned as an accused in a criminal case and being investigated/arrested in connection therewith."

The High Court had granted relief on the footing that the officer had already appeared before the Investigating Officer pursuant to the notice issued to him and had not been arrested. As recorded by the Supreme Court, the High Court "was inclined to take a lenient view" on that basis and "opined that there was no apprehension of his being arrested".

The Supreme Court did not accept that reasoning. It held, "Given the material procured by the prosecution, which warranted deeper examination, the High Court was not justified in foreclosing the possibility of custodial interrogation by granting anticipatory bail to the respondent."

Relevant to that material, the Bench noted that two mobile phone handsets seized from the respondent "were found to have been tampered with and were extensively damaged". The handsets had been sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, and its report was still awaited when the High Court granted relief.

FIR No. 28/2025 was registered by the Lokayuktha Police on June 2, 2025 under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The respondent was not named in it at the outset. The sole accused then was one Ningappa Savantha, against whom the allegation was that "he had projected himself as an official of the Lokayuktha's office, so as to extract monies under threat from public servants".

Savantha, the Court noted, was himself a police constable who had been dismissed from service for unauthorised absence and "had contact with the respondent". The prosecution's case before the High Court was that the two were in touch and that Savantha "used to visit the office of the Lokayuktha to meet the respondent".

The respondent came to be implicated through disclosures made by Savantha and was examined under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He was later arraigned as Accused No. 2 in the FIR.

Apprehending arrest, the officer first applied to the Special Court for anticipatory bail. At the same time, he filed a writ petition before the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings and obtained a stay of further proceedings. The Special Court rejected the anticipatory bail application on June 24, 2025, as further proceedings stood stayed by the High Court's order.

The writ petition was disposed of on July 8, 2025, leaving it open to the respondent to pursue the remedies available to him in law, including an application for anticipatory bail. His second application before the Special Court was rejected on July 18, 2025. He then moved the High Court under Criminal Petition No. 10806/2025 and secured anticipatory bail on September 1, 2025, which the Lokayuktha Police carried to the Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 4840/2026.

Setting aside the High Court's order, the Bench directed the respondent to surrender within three weeks from the date of the order and left him at liberty to seek regular bail thereafter "in accordance with law before the appropriate forum". The appeal was allowed, and pending applications were disposed of.

Case Title: Karnataka Lokayuktha Police, Bangalore District v. Srinath Joshi Mahadev, IPS

Bench: Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva

Order Date: October 29, 2026