Karnataka HC orders special court to defer proceedings against Siddaramaiah in MUDA scam case

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Siddaramaiah, said the Governor had not given reasons for granting the sanction and had ignored the state cabinet’s advice to reject the request for sanction to begin investigations against the CM in the land scam case.

Singhvi argued that no showcause notice had been issued to Siddaramaiah on two of the three complaints over which sanction to file cases against the CM had been sought. He also argued that the “friendly Governor” had not applied his mind while granting sanction but acted hastily.

The senior counsel also argued that the sanction could not have been granted under section 17 A of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, since the request had not been made by a police officer, as mandated under the section introduced in 2018 in an amendment to the Act.

Singhvi also argued that section 17 A deals with sanction for filing cases against public servants for acts committed in the course of performing official duties. He said there was no evidence of Siddaramaiah authorising the grant of land to his wife in 2021, when the BJP was in power in the state.

The senior counsel said that a lot of urgency was shown by the Governor in granting sanction to file a case in a matter that has a history of over 30 years and dates back to a time when Siddaramaiah was not in any position of power to influence decisions.

Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, who appeared on behalf of the Governor, argued that his client was within his rights under a 2004 judgment of the Supreme Court in the MP Special Police Establishment case to ignore the advice of the state cabinet on prosecution sanction.

The Governor accorded sanction on August 16 to three private complainants to file court cases seeking an investigation against Siddaramaiah over the 2021 allotment of 14 housing sites in Mysuru to his wife in exchange for 3.16 acre of land acquired from her by MUDA.

“I hereby accord sanction against Chief Minister Sri Siddaramaiah under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 218 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for the commission of the alleged offences as mentioned in the petitions,” the Governor said in a communique released on August 17.

The complainants—anti-corruption activists T J Abraham, Snehamayi Krishna and Pradeep Kumar—approached the Governor last month seeking sanction to file court complaints against the CM.

The activists have alleged corruption in the acquisition of 3.16 acre of land in Mysuru’s Kesare village in 2004 by Siddaramaiah’s brother-in-law B M Mallikarjun, who gifted the land in 2010 to Siddaramaiah’s wife Parvathy B M, and in the subsequent exchange of the land in 2021 for 14 housing sites by MUDA under a 50:50 scheme. Under the scheme, land equivalent to half the acquired land is allotted in a developed area.

The Siddaramaiah government stopped the 50:50 scheme in October 2023 after complaints mounted of vested interests misusing the scheme that was started during BJP rule in 2020.

‘Suspicion of wrongdoing’

In the MUDA scam, the Government has constituted two separate investigations—one by an IAS officer, Venkatachalapathy, and the other by a one-man commission headed by former Karnataka High Court judge P N Desai.

The Governor, however, has stated that the ordering of two investigations into the MUDA scam raises suspicion of wrongdoing. “Further, the constituting of a committee under an IAS officer and immediately constituting one more committee under a retired Judge of the High Court and the Government’s own acceptance that there is a potential big-ticket scam in the allotment of sites by MUDA does not inspire much confidence,” he wrote in his sanction order.

“It is a well-settled legal principle that the person against whom allegations are made should not be empowered to decide the course of action,” the Governor said.

“Upon perusal of the petition along with the materials in support of the allegations in the petitions and subsequent reply of Sri Siddaramaiah and the advice of the State Cabinet along with the legal opinion, it seems to me that there are two versions in relation to the same set of facts. It is very necessary that a neutral, objective and non-partisan investigation should be conducted. I am prima facie satisfied that the allegations and the supporting materials disclose commission of offences,” his sanction order further stated.