In a significant legal development, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed the corruption proceedings pending against state Energy Minister KJ George and other officials. The case, related to alleged irregularities in a statewide smart electric meter tender, was being heard by a special Lokayukta court in Bengaluru.
Court Halts Proceedings Initiated by BJP MLAs
The original complaint was filed by three Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) legislators—Dr CN Ashwath Narayan, SR Vishwanath, and D Muniraj. They had alleged foul play in the process of procuring and installing smart electricity meters across Karnataka. The High Court's ruling brings relief not only to Minister George but also to the late IAS officer Mahantesh Bilagi, who was the former managing director of Bescom (Bangalore Electricity Supply Company) and the Karnataka State Minerals Development Corporation. HJ Ramesh, the technical director at Bescom, was also a petitioner in the case.
The petitioners had challenged the complaint dated July 17, 2025, which was registered under sections 314, 316, and 61 of the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, alongside sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act. They also sought to nullify the special court's subsequent order from July 23, which had directed the Lokayukta's superintendent of police to file an investigation report.
Judge's Reasoning: No Evidence of Bribery or Favouritism
Justice MI Arun, while allowing the petition, provided a detailed rationale for the decision. The judge pointed out a critical absence in the allegations. "It was not the case of the complainants that the accused petitioners took money at the time of awarding the contract to the successful bidder," Justice Arun noted.
The core of the complainants' argument was that the tender process was allegedly engineered to benefit a particular bidder, described as a shell company fronting for Minister George. However, the court observed that the tender was open to several eligible participants and no one was illegally disqualified. "No favour was shown to the successful bidder in this regard," the order stated.
Allegations Point to Civil, Not Criminal, Wrong
Justice Arun clarified the nature of the grievances. He indicated that accusations about violating the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act (KTPP Act), 1999, or other procedural lapses in the tender process might potentially lead to a civil lawsuit. Such a case could be filed by parties interested in the bid or even through a public interest litigation (PIL). However, these claims did not constitute a criminal offense in this instance.
The judge further strengthened his position by highlighting that the terms of the tender were not altered after finalization to assist the winning bidder. "In fact, Bescom subsequently negotiated with the successful bidder to terms more favourably to Bescom," the court added, suggesting the state utility acted in its own financial interest.
This ruling effectively draws a line under the criminal aspect of this high-profile tender controversy, marking a major legal victory for the accused minister and officials while setting a precedent on the distinction between procedural irregularities and criminal corruption in public procurement.
