STOCK MARKET BSE NSE

Land denotification row: Karnataka High Court order today on ex-CM Yeddyurappa's plea against FIRs

ACB had registered 2 FIRs, claiming he had denotified 257 acres acquired for Dr Shivaram Karanth Layout.

Published: 21st September 2017 02:32 AM  |   Last Updated: 21st September 2017 07:35 AM   |  A+A-

BJP Karnataka president B S Yeddyurappa

By Express News Service

BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court will issue interim orders on Thursday on the plea of former Chief Minister B S Yeddyurappa seeking a stay on the FIRs registered against him by the Anti-Corruption Bureau over denotification of land.

The ACB registered two FIRs against Yeddyurappa for allegedly denotifying 257 acres acquired for Dr Shivaram Karanth Layout, based on a complaint filed by Dr Ayyappa, former vice-chancellor of a private university. Yeddyurappa has challenged the FIRs in the High Court.

Prof Ravivarma Kumar, a former advocate general, representing the ACB, argued that the former Chief Minister cannot get protection under the notification of March 14, 2016 issued by government on constituting the ACB, wherein prior sanction from the appointing authority is compulsory before investigation into the allegations against public servants.  This protection is only applicable to public servants in power.

In the denotification case, Yeddyurappa is not entitled to protection as he was not in power when the complaint was registered against him, he contended.

Earlier, Sandeep Patil, the counsel for Yeddyurappa said the ACB registered FIRs without obtaining prior sanction from the appointing authority (governor) against Yeddyurappa. The counsel also pointed out the inordinate delay in registration of FIR after receiving the complaint.

Ravivarma Kumar said the FIR is only the tip of the iceberg and large-scale irregularities have been uncovered during the probe by the anti-corruption body. He also submitted the investigation report in a sealed cover.

However, Yeddyurappa’s counsel opposed submission of documents in a sealed cover. He contended that the petitioner (Yeddyurappa) had challenged the complaint and the FIRs registered against him. Hence, the court should not give scope for the supplementary documents submitted by the ACB’s counsel after the arguments were concluded, he pleaded.



Comments

Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

IPL_2020
flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp