Karnataka High Court has rejected a plea by Congress MLA Satish Krishna Sail challenging the grant of pardon to a co-accused who decided to turn approver in a high-profile illegal mining case. The court's decision emphasizes the paramount importance of discovering the truth through all available means, including procuring additional evidence.

Justice M Nagaprasanna, while upholding the special MP/MLA judge's order granting pardon, highlighted that the essential criteria for granting such clemency under Section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) were duly fulfilled. The court emphasized that the power to grant pardon should be exercised judiciously and with proper application of mind.

The MLA, along with several other individuals, stands accused in a criminal case filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) concerning the alleged illegal export of iron ore. When the matter reached the stage of framing charges, one of the accused individuals filed an application seeking pardon, asserting their willingness to cooperate as an approver. The trial court, convinced by this plea, granted the pardon, leading Sail and a shipping company, also accused in the case, to challenge the decision in the High Court.

The petitioners argued that allowing co-accused to turn approver would set a dangerous precedent, potentially causing prejudice to the other accused individuals. However, the CBI contended that seeking the truth should be the primary goal of the criminal justice system, and if additional evidence emerges through such means, it benefits all parties involved.

Justice Nagaprasanna, in his analysis, emphasized that Section 306 of the CrPC and the essence of the criminal justice system revolve around unearthing the truth, even if it means procuring additional evidence. Referring to a landmark Supreme Court judgment in Lt. Commander Pascal Fernandes v State of Maharashtra, which deemed pardon as a permissible exercise of power, the High Court asserted that if the grant of pardon results in full disclosure of facts, it should be allowed.

Ultimately, the High Court found the trial court's order of pardon to be well-reasoned and in accordance with relevant legal precedents. Thus, it concluded that there was no justification for interference and dismissed the petition.

This decision has sent shockwaves through the legal community, setting a precedent for cases involving co-accused turning approver. With the pursuit of truth at the forefront, the Karnataka High Court's stance reinforces the belief that justice will prevail, even if it means embracing alternative avenues to uncover the facts.

Case Title: M/s Shree Mallikarjun Shipping v CBI