Karnataka Governor H.R. Bhardwaj's order granting sanction to two advocates to prosecute Chief Minister B.S. Yeddyurappa has several parallels with the controversy that surfaced when M. Channa Reddy, as Tamil Nadu Governor, gave his nod for the prosecution of the then Chief Minister, Jayalalithaa, on corruption charges.
As in the case of Mr. Bhardwaj in Karnataka, the tenure of Dr. Reddy in the Raj Bhavan in Chennai was marked by acrimony with the incumbent Chief Minister, when he gave his sanction on March 25, 1995, to Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy to prosecute Ms. Jayalalithaa in respect of two charges — one relating to the purchase of land belonging to State-owned Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation (TANSI) by a firm in which she was a partner, and another pertaining to alleged irregularities in the import of coal.
In both cases, the Governor was acting on a private complaint and in both cases, the incumbent in the Raj Bhavan acted on his own discretion rather than go by the ‘aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.'
Even though the Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition by Ms. Jayalalithaa challenging the grant of sanction to prosecute her, the Supreme Court stayed the Governor's order and referred some questions of law that arose from the sanction to a Constitution Bench.
However, the key question whether the Governor, while considering grant of sanction against a serving Chief Minister, could act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, excluding the Chief Minister, was not decided, as Ms. Jayalalithaa was acquitted in the TANSI land case and discharged from the coal import case.
However, a five-judge Bench of the Supreme Court did lay down in a 2004 verdict, pertaining to charges faced by two Ministers in Madhya Pradesh, that the Governor could independently accord sanction for prosecution of a Minister in corruption cases without the “aid and advice” of the Council of Ministers.
