Click the Play button to listen to article

The Karnataka High Court on Monday (September 21) constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to conduct a de novo investigation into the alleged Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) Veterinary Officer (Group A) recruitment scam, while declining to entrust the probe to the CBI.[2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 367]

The single judge bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the order in a batch of petitions, including those filed by BJP MLA Basanagouda R Patil Yatnal, the All-Karnataka State Students Association, and several successful and unsuccessful candidates alleging large-scale irregularities in the recruitment of 400 Veterinary Officers by the KPSC.

“…In the peculiar facts obtaining in this case, while I do not deem it appropriate to permit the investigation to continue at the hands of the CID or the jurisdictional police, I am equally not persuaded that entrustment to the CBI is the only available recourse…. I deem it appropriate to constitute a SIT comprising senior and experienced officers to undertake the investigation. It is in public domain that the ED has also registered an ECIR pursuant to the predicate offences noted hereinabove and are investigating into the offences under the PMLA. In that light, the SIT shall extend such cooperation to the ED as well in furtherance of the investigation now directed”, the court noted in the order at the outset.

The Court constituted the SIT comprising the following officers:

(i) Alok Kumar, IPS, DGP, presently IG of Prisons - to head the SIT, and,

(ii) Divya Gopinath, Director of Forensic Science Laboratory of the State, in the rank of DGP;

(iii) Anoop Shetty, IPS, Deputy Commissioner of Police;

(iv) Kushal Chouksey, IPS, Superintendent of Police;

(v) Kshama Mishra, IPS, Deputy Commissioner - to be members of the SIT.

“…The SIT shall undertake a de novo investigation into the allegations forming the subject matter of the crime in Cr. No. 78 and 89 of 2026 and all matters legitimately arising therefrom in the course of investigation. The investigation shall not be confined or shackled to the persons presently named, or the allegations presently made, or the contours presently perceived. If the evidence gathered reveals involvement of any other persons, offences or transactions with nexus to the subject matter of investigation, the SIT shall follow the evidence wherever it leads in accordance with law…”, the court added further in the order about the course of action.

The SIT shall extend cooperation and receive information from the ED in respect of the ECIR on the subject predicate offence in furtherance of the investigation now directed, the court said further in the order.

The SIT would be required to complete the investigation and file its final report before the Court within 100 days from the date it commences its investigation, the court added. The progress of the investigation shall be placed before the Court once in every 30 days.

The CID, presently conducting the investigation, shall hand over to the SIT the entire records, papers, documents, electronic evidence and other evidence collected during the investigation within one week. Likewise, the jurisdictional police investigating Cr. No. 79 shall hand over to the SIT, within the aforesaid period, the entirety of the investigation records, the court laid down in unequivocal terms.

Upon such transfer, the CID and jurisdictional police shall cease further investigation into the aforesaid crime, save and except to render assistance as may be sought by the SIT, the court added.

“…All departments, investigating agencies and public authorities shall extend untainted cooperation to the SIT….and shall furnish such records and material for the purpose of investigation. The SIT shall be at liberty to avail itself of such forensic, cyber, financial and technical assistance as may be necessary…. The SIT shall conduct the investigation independently, impartially and uninfluenced by any observations made in this order about the merits of the allegations…”, the court added further.

“…The State Government shall issue an appropriate notification notifying the SIT to be a Police Station for all purposes relating to the conduct of investigation…”, the court clarified in the order.

The prayer for quashment of crimes in the pleas shall be considered after filing of the final report, the court remarked before parting.

The matter will be taken up again on January 5, 2027, awaiting SIT's final report.

The High Court had on July 29 sought the State Government's response on a plea seeking transfer of the investigation to the CBI.

The court had heard in detail a batch of petitions including those filed by BJP MLA Basanagouda R Patil Yatnal, All-Karnataka State Students Association, a successful candidate and an unsuccessful candidate alleging large-scale irregularities in the recruitment of 400 Veterinary Officers by the KPSC.

Yatnal's plea sought a direction that CBI may be directed to register the necessary FIRs and investigate the entire conspiracy relating to recruitments conducted by the Karnataka Public Service Commission, including the Industrial Extension Officer recruitment and the Gazetted Probationers recruitment.

Another connected petition has been filed by an unsuccessful candidate seeking transfer of the investigation in the FIR registered at Vidhana Soudha Police Station on July 24, 2026, alleging large-scale corruption in the recruitment of 400 Veterinary Officers by the KPSC. The Court also heard other similarly placed candidates.

During the previous hearing, counsel for the petitioners argued that despite an earlier warning by the High Court against transferring the investigation, the State had entrusted two KPSC-related cases to the CID. The petitioners contended that past investigations by the CID had failed to effectively prosecute those responsible in similar matters and sought a CBI probe instead.

The petitioners further alleged that middlemen acting on behalf of the former KPSC Chairman and members demanded ₹80 lakh per post. ₹40 lakh was allegedly collected before candidates were taken outside Karnataka for training with question papers and answers, while the balance amount was allegedly collected after selection, with original marksheets retained as security.

Case Title: Dr. Manjunath v. State of Karnataka & Ors.

Case No.: WP No. 23448/2026 (GM-RES-528-529)

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 367

Tags: