Karnataka HC Puts On Hold Smart Meter Tender Case Against Energy Minister KJ George

Karnataka High Court granted interim stay on smart meter irregularity case against Energy Minister K.J. George & BESCOM officials.

Karnataka High Court Building (File Photo)

The Karnataka High Court, Wednesday, issued an interim stay on further action before a trial court in a case of alleged corruption in the purchase and installation of smart electric meters. The case was brought on the basis of a private complaint by leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) against State Energy Minister K.J. George and officials of the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (BESCOM).

Justice M.I. Arun served notices on the respondents and put the two petitions to further hearing on August 20. The interim order of the court clearly reads, "There shall be a stay of further proceedings before the trial court, till the next date of hearing."

Petitioners are asking to quash the private complaint, which was filed on July 17, 2025, under Section 314, Section 316, and Section 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and under Sections 13(1)(a) and 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. They also pray for setting aside the July 23 trial court order invoking powers under Section 175(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which asked the Superintendent of Police, Lokayuktha, to furnish a report on the next hearing.

#KarnatakaHighCourt hears petition filed by State Energy Minister KJ George and former BESCOM MD Mahantesh Bilagi seeking to quash the private complaint alleging irregularities in tender related to installation smart electricity meters in the state. pic.twitter.com/7Iq7yHo4eH

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) August 6, 2025

Senior Advocate C.V. Nagesh, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, submitted that the accused, being the Minister among them, are public servants and they are entitled to protection at two levels: at the stage of initiation of prosecution and at the stage of taking cognizance. He underlined that in terms of Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, a public servant is afforded protection which mandates prior sanction for inquiry or investigation into public office offenses.

Nagesh argued that the impugned order of the trial court was not permissible since it ordered the Lokayuktha police to file a report without first inviting a report from the superior officer of the accused, which, he claimed, is obligatory in case of public servants. "In this case, the trial court has given an order asking Lokayukta police to file a report which is not proper," he said.

On the contrary, Senior Advocate Lakshmy Iyengar, on behalf of the respondent-complainants (Dr. Ashwathnarayan C.N. and others), rebutted that the magistrate would issue calls for reports from senior officers once the police report is obtained. She maintained that the action of the trial court was nothing but a request for a progress report of the complaint made to the Lokayuktha and that Sections 175(3) and 175(4) of the BNSS are not contradictory regarding the powers of the Magistrate to issue calls for reports.

Three BJP MLAs – C.N. Ashwath Narayan, S.R. Vishwanath, and Dheeraj Muniraj – approached the court with a private complaint after they had first approached the Lokayuktha police in April and complained. Since the Lokayuktha police allegedly delayed filing an FIR, the MLAs filed the private complaint itself before the special court, which granted the stayed order later on.

The case, which is named K.J. George AND State of Karnataka & Others, is filed as Criminal Petition 11573/2025.