The Karnataka High Court has set aside an FIR filed against Infosys co-founder Kris Gopalakrishnan and others under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The Court said the complaint was "an abuse of the process of law" and gave permission to start criminal contempt action against the complainant.
Justice Hemant Chandangoudar gave the order on April 16. He stated that the complaint was "a vexatious attempt to harass the petitioners."
The case started with a private complaint from D. Sanna Durgappa, a former teacher at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc). He was removed from the institute in 2014 after an internal inquiry into sexual harassment charges. The High Court pointed out that after Durgappa challenged his removal in 2015, the issue was settled by changing the termination into a resignation. As part of the settlement, Durgappa had agreed to withdraw all complaints and legal cases against the IISc and its representatives.
Read Also:- Karnataka HC Pauses SC/ST Act Case Against Infosys Co-Founder Kris Gopalakrishnan and 17 IISc Faculty
However, despite the settlement, Durgappa filed two more FIRs later, both of which were thrown out by courts in 2022 and 2023. The latest FIR was found to have the same accusations, which the Court ruled as a misuse of the judicial system.
The Court said:
"The allegations made do not attract any offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The matter was essentially civil in nature but wrongly given a criminal color."
Reacting to the Court’s decision, Kris Gopalakrishnan said:
"I have full faith in our courts and the justice system. This judgment reaffirms that misuse of legal provisions has no place in a fair and just system. I am grateful that the Hon'ble High Court has seen through the falsehoods and upheld the truth."
The High Court also allowed Kris Gopalakrishnan and others to approach the Advocate General for permission to start criminal contempt proceedings against Durgappa for filing such complaints even after a settlement.
The Court firmly stated:
"This is not just a misuse of the law, but a direct attack on the dignity and fairness expected in legal proceedings."
