Read Time: 06 minutes
The CM challenged the order of a single judge bench, which dismissed his petition challenging Governor Gehlot's approval for a probe against him in the land scam case
Karnataka Chief Minister (CM) Siddaramaiah has filed an appeal before a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court against a recent ruling that upheld Governor Thaawar Chand Gehlot's decision to grant sanction for investigation and prosecution in connection with the alleged multi-crore Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) scam.
The appeal is filed in response to an order issued by a single-judge bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna, on September 24, 2024, dismissing Siddaramaiah's plea seeking to quash the Governor’s sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act (POCA) and Section 218 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), referred to as Section 197 under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court, in its previous order, held that “The facts narrated in the petition need investigation,” while dismissing Siddaramaiah’s plea. The court had also stated that it is the complainant’s duty to secure such approval, while the Governor is entitled to exercise independent discretion in making the decision.
Following the order of the High Court, on September 25, 2024, a Special Court ordered a Lokayukta Police investigation to be launched against the CM.
The complaint was filed by activists TJ Abraham, Snehamayi Krishna, and Pradeep Kumar SP, with Abraham first seeking the Governor's sanction in July 2024. The complainants alleged irregularities in compensatory site allotments. A 3.2-acre land parcel, was allegedly gifted to CM Siddaramaiah's wife Parvathi by her brother in 2010, which was later acquired by MUDA. Parvathi was then compensated with 14 plots, reportedly more valuable than the original land. A money laundering case was also filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), against the CM on September 30, 2024, following the orders of a special court, after the High Court upheld Governor Gehlot's clearance for an investigation against him.
Siddaramaiah has argued that the decision, granting sanction for prosecution, was “illegal and void ab initio.” The CM alleged the order was politically motivated and lacked proper application of mind, violating constitutional principles, including the advice of the Council of Ministers, which is binding under Article 163 of the Constitution. However, the court stated that under normal circumstances, the Governor acts on the aid and advice of the council of ministers but in exceptional situations, the Governor has the authority to make independent decisions, emphasising that “the present case projects such exception.”
Additionally, the court order clarified that, “The decision of the governor of alleged hot haste has not vitiated the order, the order is restrictive to approval under Section 17A of the Act and not an order granting sanction under 218 of BNSS,” highlighting that even if the order was taken swiftly by the Governor, it does not render it invalid.
Cause Title: Siddaramaiah v. State of Karnataka & Others [WA 1569/2024]
Please Login or Register
