
BENGALURU: Taking on record the report of the investigation and accompanying documents submitted by the Lokayukta police in a sealed cover on the alleged irregularities in the allotment of 14 compensatory sites to BM Parvathy, wife of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA), the Karnataka High Court on Monday reserved its judgment on a petition filed by a Mysuru-based social activist seeking to refer the case being probed by the Lokayukta police to CBI.
The court also 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 judgment. Justice M Nagaprasanna passed the order while reserving the verdict after the conclusion of the marathon hearing on the petition filed by Snehamayi Krishna.
Arguing for the petitioner, senior advocate Maninder Singh contended that the matter is required to be referred to the CBI for impartial probe since the high functionaries of the state are involved. Also, the CM should not function as he is under a cloud over his integrity. Nobody cast doubts over the probe by the Lokayukta police, but it has to go to the CBI in view of administrative and political compulsions on the Lokayukta agency, he argued.
Pointing out that the cabinet note, chief secretary’s note and legal opinion are to favour Siddaramaiah in the matter, Singh said that to meet the ends of justice and in the interest of the public, the probe must be handed over to the CBI since there is no possibility of fairness by the state, in view of efforts already made to brush the case under the carpet.
Appearing for Devaraju, who sold the land to CM’s brother-in-law Mallikarjuna Swamy, senior advocate Dushyant Dave argued that the petition deserved to be dismissed as the same is gross abuse of process of law, since there is a delay of 20 years. Though the petitioner stated on oath that it requires 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 CM, he alleged.
‘Common man has faith in Lokayukta’
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, it 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 is accepted, the Lokayukta Act will be unconstitutional. The counsel cannot argue against the statute of Lokayukta, saying the chief minister is involved, he argued.
Appearing for Siddaramaiah, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that without illegalities committed by the special court, which ordered a probe by the Lokayukta police, the CBI probe cannot be sought. The complainant cannot choose the investigating agency and if so, there should be principles of the rarest of rare case but it is not established 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.