FIR validity and CAG reports: Lokayukta-based criminal cases cannot rest on audit material without statutory police information.

FIRs registered by Lokayukta Police were unsustainable because the material before the police was not first information under Section 154(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The complaint originated as a Lokayukta complaint, accompanied by a CAG report, and not as police information setting criminal law in motion; the FIRs also did not show suo motu registration under Section 157(1). The Court further stated that a CAG report, though relevant for legislative scrutiny, cannot by itself serve as the foundation for a criminal prosecution or replace proper police information in a criminal trial. The FIRs were therefore liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the FIRs registered by the Lokayuktha Police were sustainable when they were not founded on information in the manner required by Section 154(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether the Comptroller and Auditor General's report could be used as the basis for initiating and sustaining the criminal cases.

Analysis: The complaint placed before the Lokayuktha was not an oral or written first information given to the police station in the manner contemplated by Section 154(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The papers annexed to the FIRs showed that the source was a complaint made to the Lokayuktha under the Karnataka Lokayuktha Act, 1984, together with the CAG report, and not a police information setting the criminal law in motion. The FIRs also did not disclose registration on a suo motu police report under Section 157(1) of the Code. The Court further held that, although the CAG is a constitutional authority and its reports may inform legislative scrutiny, such reports are subject to examination by the Legislature and cannot be treated as a foundation for a criminal prosecution or as material to be tested in a criminal trial in place of a proper police information.

Conclusion: The FIRs were unsustainable and liable to be quashed; the CAG report could not be used as the basis for criminal action against the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: A criminal case cannot be validly initiated on a complaint to the Lokayuktha and a CAG report unless the information satisfies the statutory requirements for registration of an FIR under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and a legislative audit report cannot itself serve as the foundation of a criminal prosecution.

---