BSY might end up appearing in court

Hearing the former chief minister’s petition seeking quashing of the Governor’s sanction to prosecute him, a division Bench comprising Justice Ajit Gunjal and Justice B V Nagaratna rejected the plea. “We are informed that two petitions seeking relief are pending before the High Court, which includes a petition seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC,” the court observed.

Earlier, the special Bench had said that since the matter involved the Governor, it required more time for deliberation. The Bench also said it could consider an interim order.

Supreme Court senior counsel Ram Jethmalani, who appeared on behalf of Yeddyurappa,filed an application to implead the State Government and sought exemption from appearing before the trial court.

The counsel expressed apprehension that if the former chief minister appeared before the court, he might be remanded to judicial custody. “My (Yeddyurappa’s) liberty is at stake.”

Jethmalani said he had never heard of being sent to jail based on a private complaint. In another former minister’s case, cognizance had been taken on a private complaint, and he was sent to judicial custody, he pointed out.

Blaming the governor for the debacle, Jethmalani said, “Everything was fine until the governor came. He is on a mission to demolish the government and has recommended to impose President’s rule, which was declined by his own party at the Centre,” he said.

Stating that the Governor’s action is biased and was without jurisdiction since he had not taken into consideration the advice of the council of ministers as required under the law, Jethmalani cited several incidents where the governor had acted in bias. 

Citing the incident of the 16 MLAs, who had approached him stating that they had withdrawn support to the Yeddyurappa government, he said, “On this occasion, he had written to the Speaker not to do anything to change the numericals in the House.” The Governor’s sanction, he argued, was without application of mind.

Counsel for Sirajin Basha, P P Rao, in his submission, contended that the facts in the complaint by Basha were not false as the governor had accorded sanction only after verifying records. He had also called for records from Chief Secretary to verify and study.
Jethmalani said that the former chief minister was seeking protection of liberty. If in pursuance of  summons, he continues to appear in the court, there shall be no interference with his other liberties without the leave of this court,” he said.

However the bench refused to buy the argument and observed, “The apprehension might be true. But there is no reason to believe that. We decline to grant the request of the petitioner.”

The Bench also termed the sanction of governor as just and unbiased, and directed the State which was impleaded by the petitioners on Thursday to file objections by October 18.