<p>The CID filed the case with the Vidhana Soudha police to investigate the alleged irregularities in the UKP between 1995 and 1998 when Deve Gowda was Karnataka chief minister.<br /><br />“DSP Shankarappa filed an FIR in the Vidhana Soudha police station on October 24 and a case was registered in crime number 56/2011 under sections 465 m, 467, 468, 471, 408, 429 and 129(B) of the IPC and 131 (1)(C) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1986. In this case, since the names of the accused are not yet known, no person has been named as accused in the accused column. It is mentioned that accused are not yet identified,” CID chief Shankar Bidari said. <br /><br />However, considering that Deve Gowda was the chief minister during the period the case refers to, the FIR is being seen as directed against the former prime minister. Gowda has been vocal against corruption in the BJP government. <br /><br />Reacting to reports of inclusion of a few names of senior politicians as accused persons in the case, Bidari said: “Certain allegations made by non-officials regarding the action taken by the CID are baseless, malafide, mischievous and intended to overawe the investigating agency from discharging its legitimate duties in a fair and impartial manner. <br /><br />The CID has taken action without fear or favour and without malice towards anybody and will conduct fair investigation.”<br /><br />As for the names of some of the accused persons, Bidari told Deccan Herald there documents related to the case run into more than 8,000 pages which would require time to study and careful scrutiny. In the course of the investigation, Bidari said, if the investigating officer (IO) discovers the involvement of any person or persons, those names will appear in the FIR. <br /><br />An officer of the rank of police inspector or DSP will be appointed as the IO, Bidari said, but refused to the disclose the investigating officer’s name. “The CID always maintains secrecy in such issues. Hence, it is improper to disclose the name. I have already appointed the IO who has begun work,” Bidari added. <br /><br />Quoting the allegations made by a retired chief engineer H T Somasekhara Reddy, Shankarappa is understood to have said in a representation that the case involved alleged irregularities, corruption, misappropriation of public money and fraud by state government officials and non-officials as well as contractors in the implementation of the projects under the UKP in Narayanpur, Kembhavi and Bheemarayangudi divisions between 1995 and 1998.<br /><br />The DSP’s representation, which was made a part of the FIR, also says that fake bills were raised in the purchase of cement, steel and explosives, besides awarding several sub-contracts in violation of the main contract which stipulated that only one contractor would execute the project. However, according to Shankarappa’s representation, one contractor was awarded several other contracts. <br /><br />“Four select contractors were awarded 59 sub-contracts,” according to an allegation Somasekahara Reddy.<br /><br />According to the complaint, exorbitant amounts of money was paid to the contractors even though the work was of poor quality. Expenses were shown against repair of canal even though no work had been carried out. Likewise, it is alleged that the government incurred expenditure for desiltation, although no such work was undertaken. Similarly, cheques based on fake bills were given away to the contractors. <br /><br />Along with his representation, Shankarappa enclosed four documents which include copies of the CID’s legal opinion (September 20, 2011), a state government order declaring that a CID inquiry, rather than a CBI probe, could be conducted (December 20, 2010), Somasekhara Reddy’s representation to the then chief secretary (January 22, 2010) and a Karnataka High Court order in the writ petition filed by the retired chief engineer on November 9, 2009.<br /><br />Reddy’s petition filed in 1999, sought a CBI probe on the basis of a report submitted by the Estimates Committee of the Karnataka Assembly and the findings of the CAG which allegedly found instances of financial irregularities and other misappropriation of funds in the UKP between 1995 and 1998.<br /><br /> In an order a division Bench comprising the then chief justice P D Dinakaran and Justice Mohan Shanatangaudar directed Reddy to submit a representation before the chief secretary within six weeks. Before disposing off the petition, the high court directed the chief secretary to consider Reddy’s representation.<br /><br />H D Kumaraswamy on the FIR<br /><br />“The government is filing a case pertaining to the Upper Krishna project virtually ten years after the allegations were made. This is nothing but vindictive politics. I know the officers who are behind this, and I will expose them. The matter was discussed in two cabinet meetings and a house committee report too was submitted. The case was closed, only to be reopened now due to vested interest.”</p>
<p>The CID filed the case with the Vidhana Soudha police to investigate the alleged irregularities in the UKP between 1995 and 1998 when Deve Gowda was Karnataka chief minister.<br /><br />“DSP Shankarappa filed an FIR in the Vidhana Soudha police station on October 24 and a case was registered in crime number 56/2011 under sections 465 m, 467, 468, 471, 408, 429 and 129(B) of the IPC and 131 (1)(C) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1986. In this case, since the names of the accused are not yet known, no person has been named as accused in the accused column. It is mentioned that accused are not yet identified,” CID chief Shankar Bidari said. <br /><br />However, considering that Deve Gowda was the chief minister during the period the case refers to, the FIR is being seen as directed against the former prime minister. Gowda has been vocal against corruption in the BJP government. <br /><br />Reacting to reports of inclusion of a few names of senior politicians as accused persons in the case, Bidari said: “Certain allegations made by non-officials regarding the action taken by the CID are baseless, malafide, mischievous and intended to overawe the investigating agency from discharging its legitimate duties in a fair and impartial manner. <br /><br />The CID has taken action without fear or favour and without malice towards anybody and will conduct fair investigation.”<br /><br />As for the names of some of the accused persons, Bidari told Deccan Herald there documents related to the case run into more than 8,000 pages which would require time to study and careful scrutiny. In the course of the investigation, Bidari said, if the investigating officer (IO) discovers the involvement of any person or persons, those names will appear in the FIR. <br /><br />An officer of the rank of police inspector or DSP will be appointed as the IO, Bidari said, but refused to the disclose the investigating officer’s name. “The CID always maintains secrecy in such issues. Hence, it is improper to disclose the name. I have already appointed the IO who has begun work,” Bidari added. <br /><br />Quoting the allegations made by a retired chief engineer H T Somasekhara Reddy, Shankarappa is understood to have said in a representation that the case involved alleged irregularities, corruption, misappropriation of public money and fraud by state government officials and non-officials as well as contractors in the implementation of the projects under the UKP in Narayanpur, Kembhavi and Bheemarayangudi divisions between 1995 and 1998.<br /><br />The DSP’s representation, which was made a part of the FIR, also says that fake bills were raised in the purchase of cement, steel and explosives, besides awarding several sub-contracts in violation of the main contract which stipulated that only one contractor would execute the project. However, according to Shankarappa’s representation, one contractor was awarded several other contracts. <br /><br />“Four select contractors were awarded 59 sub-contracts,” according to an allegation Somasekahara Reddy.<br /><br />According to the complaint, exorbitant amounts of money was paid to the contractors even though the work was of poor quality. Expenses were shown against repair of canal even though no work had been carried out. Likewise, it is alleged that the government incurred expenditure for desiltation, although no such work was undertaken. Similarly, cheques based on fake bills were given away to the contractors. <br /><br />Along with his representation, Shankarappa enclosed four documents which include copies of the CID’s legal opinion (September 20, 2011), a state government order declaring that a CID inquiry, rather than a CBI probe, could be conducted (December 20, 2010), Somasekhara Reddy’s representation to the then chief secretary (January 22, 2010) and a Karnataka High Court order in the writ petition filed by the retired chief engineer on November 9, 2009.<br /><br />Reddy’s petition filed in 1999, sought a CBI probe on the basis of a report submitted by the Estimates Committee of the Karnataka Assembly and the findings of the CAG which allegedly found instances of financial irregularities and other misappropriation of funds in the UKP between 1995 and 1998.<br /><br /> In an order a division Bench comprising the then chief justice P D Dinakaran and Justice Mohan Shanatangaudar directed Reddy to submit a representation before the chief secretary within six weeks. Before disposing off the petition, the high court directed the chief secretary to consider Reddy’s representation.<br /><br />H D Kumaraswamy on the FIR<br /><br />“The government is filing a case pertaining to the Upper Krishna project virtually ten years after the allegations were made. This is nothing but vindictive politics. I know the officers who are behind this, and I will expose them. The matter was discussed in two cabinet meetings and a house committee report too was submitted. The case was closed, only to be reopened now due to vested interest.”</p>
