Published Apr 02, 2026 | 2:30 PM ⚊ Updated Apr 02, 2026 | 2:30 PM
Rohini Sindhuri IAS.
Synopsis: The Karnataka High Court directed the state government to provide approval to file an FIR against IAS officer Rohini Sindhuri under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The case relates to the purchase of eco-friendly cloth bags at a price higher than the market price for distribution in the Mysore City Corporation and other local bodies.
The Karnataka High Court directed the state government to provide approval to file an FIR against IAS officer Rohini Sindhuri under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), for her role in an alleged scam that cost the state exchequer nearly ₹5.88 crore.
Sindhuri, who was the Deputy Commissioner (DC) of Mysuru in 2021, is alleged to have approved the purchase of 14,71,458 eco-friendly cloth bags for ₹52 per piece when the market rate was ₹13 per piece, for distribution in the Mysore City Corporation and other local bodies.
The complaint was filed by Ravichandra Gowda, a social activist and lawyer, before the then Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Mysuru, with these allegations.
The court, in its order, noted that the complaint registered was neither vague nor speculative. “It did set out, with clarity and documentary support, an allegation that prima facie discloses abuse of the office and consequential financial loss to the state,” it observed.
The court further remarked that if such material does not even warrant approval to initiate an investigation under Section 17A, it is “constrained to ponder what would.”
The IAS officer had previously decided to ban plastic bags and distribute eco-friendly cloth bags to the residents of Mysuru when she was the city’s DC in 2021.
In his complaint before the ACB, Gowda had alleged that a bag was being sold at ₹13 per bag in the retail market. But the same bag is sought to be procured at ₹52 per bag.
“It would be four times the value that is sold in the retail market,” the petitioner had said. He contended that the loss caused to the exchequer of the state is ₹5,88,58,320.
Gowda also alleged that funds that belonged to other local bodies meant for development purposes were diverted for this purpose and were directed to be deposited into the account of the DC.
While the ACB Bengaluru sought the government’s approval in December 2021 under Section 17A of the Act to register a criminal case, the same was rejected in September 2022.
The complainant challenged this decision in the high court, whose coordinate bench had quashed the initial order by the state for the “lack of application of mind,” according to a report by LiveLaw. It remitted the matter back in February 2025, directing the government to consider it fresh in accordance with the law.
However, the government declined the approval again in May 2025. The court criticised the government for choosing to issue a “verbatim similar” order as to the one that was quashed before, except for the argument that the officer had been exonerated in a departmental enquiry.
“The pivotal question that thus arises for consideration is whether such exoneration in a departmental proceeding can legitimately constitute a foundation for refusal of approval under Section 17A of the Act? The factual canvas is neither complex nor obscure,” the court observed.
It further pointed out that the controversy “strikes at the very heart of public probity” and discloses “prima facie elements of corruption”.
In fact, the court also said that it would have ordinarily deemed it appropriate to remit the matter back to the government for fresh consideration. “However, in the peculiar facts of the present case, render such a course, both unnecessary and unwarranted,” it said.
The court also remarked that the “spectre of corruption” once raised, based on material placed on record, cannot be summarily extinguished at the threshold. “It must be allowed to unfold through the process of investigation, which alone can ascertain the truth,” it said.
Sindhuri is no stranger to such controversies.
In 2021, while the state was reeling under the Covid-19 pandemic, Sindhuri was accused of constructing a swimming pool and an indoor gym in her official residence, which is a heritage building, by flouting heritage conservation rules.
The allegations were made by former minister and JD(S) leader SR Mahesh, former Mysuru City Corporation corporator KV Mallesh and former MP Pratap Simha. The state government had then ordered an inquiry.
The probe report had noted that Sindhuri did not obtain the necessary clearances before constructing the pool. While the officer had claimed that the facility was built as a pilot project of the government-owned Nirmiti Kendra, the report rubbished these claims.
It stated that the project did not have any public interest to qualify for a pilot project, as the swimming pool was not meant for the public.
Another allegation had surfaced during the pandemic regarding the deaths of 24 Covid patients at a district hospital in Chamarajnagar due to a shortage of oxygen. Sindhuri’s then counterpart in Chamarajnagar accused her of holding up the timely supply of oxygen cylinders to the district.
However, a three-member committee appointed by the Karnataka High Court to probe the deaths gave a clean chit to Sindhuri, while coming down heavily on the Chamarajnagar DC.
(Edited by Muhammed Fazil.)
