MUDA case: Petitioner files plea in K’taka HC questioning quash order on CBI probe
Bengaluru: In a major development regarding the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case allegedly involving Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, the petitioner Snehamayi Krishna has filed a writ petition before the division bench of the Karnataka High Court, questioning the single bench order of quashing his appeal for the CBI investigation into the MUDA case.
The petition appeal petition has been filed on Tuesday, when the budget session is in motion and the development is seen as a setback for CM Siddaramaiah, who is all set to present the budget on March 7.
The petition prayed to set aside the order dated February 7 passed by the learned single judge.
“Grant any other or further relief/s to the Appellant which this Hon’ble High Court deems fit and thinks proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, to meet the ends of justice,” the petition further prayed.
The petitioner has stated in the appeal petition that he reserves the right and liberty to challenge the closure report filed by the Lokayukta before the jurisdictional court and does not impugn the closure report in these proceedings.
The Union government, State of Karnataka, The Director, CBI, SP CBI, Karnataka Lokayukta SP Mysuru, Karnataka DGP, ADGP Lokayukta, Vijayanagar police station inspector are also made as parties in the appeal petition.
Siddaramaiah is named as respondent number 9, his wife B.M. Parvathi as 10th and brother-in-law Mallikarjunaswamy as 11th and land owner D. Devaraju as 12th respondents. However, in the MUDA scam, Siddaramaiah is named as accused number one, his wife Parvathi is second, Mallikarjunaswamy third and Devaraju as fourth accused persons.
The memorandum of writ appeal is made under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 read with Rule 27 of the High Court Writ Proceedings Rules 1977.
The appeal petition is filed through Vasantha Kumara and Associates, Kumara Park West, Bengaluru.
The petition claimed that the Learned Single Judge completely erred in framing questions that were never urged and pleaded before the court. The Appellant never doubted nor did he question the credibility of the Lokayukta and it is only due to the Respondent No.9’s ( Siddaramaiah) influence over the state machinery that the entire investigation be tainted with real likelihood of bias and would not instil confidence in the public or the complainant.
It further stated: “That the learned single judge failed to take into consideration that the documents appended in the writ petition are sufficient proof that the Respondent No.9 at all times has misused the trust in order to fulfil personal goals with the aid and assistance of his family members and officials of MUDA.”
The petition stated that the Respondent No.9 (CM Siddaramaiah) has a history of criminal antecedents wherein allegations were made against him on various grounds wherein, some instances are, that the Respondent No 9 misused his office and helped his son to secure the contract at BMRCI to set-up diagnostic centre and also has de-notified about 541 acres of land which was acquired for formation of Arkavathy Layout and has obtained bribe and further Respondent No.9 has alleged to have issued mining license to a company by violating the conditions and rules prescribed.
However, no investigations were conducted by any investigating agency to identify the truth of the matter and all such cases registered before various investigating agencies were closed. Such facts would only indicate that the Respondent No.9 is an influential person having deep roots in the bureaucracy, and to insulate him from any sort of fair investigation, the petitioner stated.
“The Respondent No. 9, who is currently the Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka, is the executive head of the state and his writ runs large in all aspects of administration of the state machinery which includes the investigation of any offences. Further, the State government vide its Order dated 31.08.2024 issued by the Under Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, to Sri. G T Dinesh Kumar, KAS, suspended the said official, on the ground of involvement in the MUDA misappropriation,” the petition stated.
Most importantly, the Writ Court noted that if the events or the link in the chain of events are noted, there are few dots to be connected. It is that connection of dots that would require an inquiry or an investigation in the least, whereby, the law was completely towards prima facie illegality only to favour the wife of the Respondent No 9 (Siddaramaiah) as the very allotment of sites as compensation is said to be contrary to the law, the petition underlined.
In a major relief for Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, the Dharwad Bench of the Karnataka High Court, led by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, on Friday quashed a petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the court had reserved its verdict on January 27.
