A bench of division of the High Court of Karnataka had declared during the issuance of the order of July 27: “Although the investigation into crimes nos. 21 and 30 of 2021 is continuing, the final report will not be filed without court authorization “.

The plaintiff who is at the center of the controversy over a CD allegedly featuring Jarkiholi which aired on television channels on March 2 – forcing the minister’s resignation the next day – questioned the appointment of an SIT to investigate on the cases and requested that the HC inquiries be canceled.

The SIT reported to the CH on July 19 on the status of the investigation into the sexual assault allegations and counter-extortion allegations.

On Thursday, the court asked how the SIT had been able to conduct the investigation when its boss had been on leave for almost three months.

The court noted that “no document has been recorded to show that an order was taken by the state government making another policeman the head of the SIT”, in the absence of the officer. by IPS Soumendu Mukherjee.

Mukherjee had said earlier that he was unable to supervise the investigation personally and that he had allowed IPS agent Sandeep Patil to present reports to the court, the HC division chamber noted. .

State attorney general Prabhuling Navadgi argued on Thursday that the investigation was not marred by the absence of the person named as head of the SIT and that a team of officers had carried out the investigation .

The High Court asked if the head of SIT would study the investigation report. The tribunal was, however, informed that the head of the SIT would not reassess the investigation carried out in his absence.

The court released the cases for next month on the issues raised in the petitions. SIT has not made any arrests in these cases so far, and two former media staff linked to the extortion case have been questioned at length by SIT after being granted bail.