BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court on Friday dismissed a petition filed by a Mysuru-based social activist seeking to entrust the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) with the probe into alleged irregularities in the allotment of 14 compensatory sites, including commercial plots, to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's wife B M Parvathy by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA).
Observing that the materials provided by the Karnataka Lokayukta police did not suggest that their probe into the alleged irregularities in the allotment of compensatory sites was partisan or shoddy, Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by Snehamayi Krishna, refusing to refer the investigation to the CBI. The detailed order is yet to be available.
The judge noted that the office of Lokayukta does not suffer from questionable independence and there is no malady of the kind projected by the Supreme Court to refer the matter for investigation or further investigation by the CBI. Also, the insulation of the institution from external influence is already recognised by the apex court and the high court. It is not a panacea for the projected ill.
The Lokayukta police are probing the case following the order passed by a special court to register crimes against Siddaramaiah, his wife, brother-in-law and others, on a private complaint filed by Snehamayi Krishna. They submitted the report of the investigation to the High Court during the hearing.
Taking on record the report of the investigation accompanying documents submitted by the Lokayukta police in a sealed cover into the alleged irregularities in the allotment of sites, the High Court on January 27 reserved the judgment.
At the same time, the High Court had directed the Lokayukta police not to file the final report of the probe before the Special Court for the trial of criminal cases against sitting and former MPs/MLAs till the pronouncement of the order on the petition seeking the CBI probe.
Arguing on behalf of the petitioner, senior advocate Maninder Singh contended that the matter is required to be referred to the CBI for impartial investigation since the high functionaries of the state are involved. Also, the chief minister should not function under a cloud over his integrity. Nobody cast doubts over the probe by the Lokayukta police but it has to go for CBI given administrative and political compulsions on Lokayukta agency, he argued.
Also pointing out that the cabinet note, chief secretary's note and legal opinion are in unison to favour the Siddaramaiah on the matter, Singh said all of them were in unison made out of no irregularity. To meet the ends of justice and in public interest, the probe must be handed over to the CBI since there is no possibility of fairness by the state given efforts already made to put the case under the carpet, he alleged.
On behalf of the state government, senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the probe is underway and a status report is already filed. If there are any inter-state ramifications or the court is not satisfied with the Lokayukta probe or the police officials involved in the scam, the probe can be transferred to the CBI. But no such instance can be found. If there is a closure report, the complainant can file a protest petition. If the arguments of the complainant's counsel are accepted, the Lokayukta Act will be unconstitutional. The counsel cannot argue against the statute of Lokayukta, saying the chief minister is involved, he argoed.
Appearing for Siddaramaiah, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that without illegalities committed by the special court which ordered for probe by the Lokayukta police, the CBI probe cannot be sought. Not a whisper of a word, except naming the chief minister in the complaint. The complainant cannot choose the investigating agency and if so, there should be principles of the rarest of rare cases but not established the same in this case. The Lokayukta is a comprehensive agency for which the common man has immense faith, he argued.
Senior advocate prof Ravivarma Kumar, representing Parvathy, argued that the CBI is not an independent investigating agency and there are so many victims of the agency. Therefore, the probe cannot be entrusted to the CBI, he argued.
Appearing for Devaraju, who sold the land to Mallikarjuna Swamy, brother-in-law of Siddaramaiah, senior advocate Dushyant Dave argued that the petition deserved to be dismissed as the same is gross abuse of process of law, since there was delay of 20 years. Though the petitioner stated on oath that it requires a probe by Lokayukta which was created by way of statute, he again knocked on the doors of this court for a CBI probe only to embarrass the chief minister, he alleged.
Representing Mallikarjuna Swamy, senior advocate Aditya Sondhi submitted that there is a conspiracy behind the petition which is very vague.
