Two petitions were heard together before the Karnataka High Court involving retired government officials charged with possessing disproportionate assets under the Prevention of Corruption Act. In CrlP 3849/2019, H.M. Khyum Ali (retired Deputy Director, Dept of Mines & Geology) challenged the dismissal of his discharge application in a case alleging 70.81% disproportionate assets, while in WP 48145/2018, M.K. Baldevakrishna (a retired IAS officer) challenged the FIR, charge sheet, and cognizance order alleging 116.41% disproportionate assets. Key issues included whether sanction under Section 19 of the PC Act was required when the accused had retired before cognizance was taken, and whether the cognizance order reflected proper application of mind. The court held that no sanction is required post-retirement, that the amendment to Section 19 of the PC Act is prospective, that cognizance is valid if the court applied its mind on perusal of the final report, and that disputed facts and commenced trial proceedings make interference under Section 482 CrPC or writ jurisdiction inappropriate.