Karnataka HC Extends Stay on Siddaramaiah’s Trial Court Proceedings in MUDA Case Until September 9
(Judicial Quest News Network)
Banguluru 02, September, 2024
On Monday, the Karnataka High Court extended until September 9 the interim stay on trial court proceedings involving Chief Minister Siddaramaiah in connection with the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case. The court also adjourned the hearing on Siddaramaiah’s petition challenging the legality of Governor Thavarchand Gehlot’s sanction for his prosecution in this case.
The bench, presided over by Justice M. Naga Prasanna, granted a one-week extension for the hearing. Senior Advocate K.G. Raghavan, representing the respondents, made submissions when the hearing resumed. Raghavan requested the court to view the sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act not as adversarial but as a necessary measure to ensure transparency in public administration and restore public confidence.
The Governor of Karnataka had granted the sanction on August 16, under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Section 218 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to prosecute Siddaramaiah for alleged offenses detailed in petitions filed by Kumar S.P., T.J. Abraham, and Sneha My Krishna. Siddaramaiah challenged the legality of this sanction in his petition filed on August 19, arguing that it was issued without proper consideration and violated statutory and constitutional principles, including the advice of the Council of Ministers as stipulated under Article 163 of the Constitution of India.
Siddaramaiah contends that the Governor’s decision is legally unsustainable, procedurally flawed, and influenced by extraneous considerations. Raghavan, however, defended the sanction, emphasizing that the Prevention of Corruption Act aims to prevent the misuse of public office for personal gain. He argued that even indirect personal influence over matters where one stands to benefit could constitute an offense under Section 7 of the Act.
Raghavan urged the court to consider the necessity of maintaining public confidence in administration and to not view the sanction merely as an adversarial tool. He pointed out that the establishment of a commission of inquiry under the Commission of Inquiry Act, as directed by the Congress government on July 14, underscores the importance of investigating the MUDA scam.
The commission, headed by former High Court Judge Justice P.N. Desai, was tasked with probing the alleged irregularities in the MUDA case. Raghavan noted that the existence of this inquiry does not preclude the need for a criminal prosecution but indicates the seriousness of the allegations.
The allegations in the MUDA case involve the allocation of valuable plots in a market area in Mysore to Siddaramaiah’s wife, B.M. Parvati, under a 50:50 ratio scheme. The scheme, intended to provide land to those who lost property to MUDA for development, reportedly benefited Parvati disproportionately. The opposition has also claimed that Parvati had no legal title to the 3.16 acres of land in question.
The court has scheduled the next hearing for September 9 at 2:30 p.m., and the interim order granted on August 19 will remain in effect until then.
