HC finds no merit in Yeddyurappa's plea

HC finds no merit in Yeddyurappa's plea

HC finds no merit in Yeddyurappa's plea

“There is nothing improper in this matter being referred to Lokayukta Police and Police registering complaint for probe. If the special judge has right to take cognisance of criminal offence while admitting a private complaint and it is not barred, then we cannot understand contentions.

A judge who can receive complaint under section 200 CrPC and take cognisance of it, why can’t he refer it under Section 156 (3) of CrPC,” the Division Bench comprising Justices K L Manjunath and H S Kempanna noted, while rejecting the plea.

Lokauykta had registered complaint following a complaint by JD(S) spokesperson and MLC, Y S V Datta, alleging quid pro quo in awarding contracts for the irrigation project.

Senior counsel Uday U Lalit, who appeared for Yeddyurappa cited a 2006 Supreme Court judgement in a MCOCA case. But the Court dismissed the argument saying that was not applicable for the case on hand. He contended that the Special Judge has no jurisdiction to refer the case under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, to the Lokayukta Police. The special judge’s powers was restricted to collection of evidence.

The Lokayukta in its objections to the advance bail plea by Yeddyurappa in the same case, has contended that the petitioner has political connection and would interfere with the investigation, influence witness and tamper evidence, if freed.

War of words at hearing
The hearing of the anticipatory bail plea of former chief minister B S Yeddyurappa turned ugly at the High Court on Friday, with the counsel for Sirajin Basha, C H Hanumantharayappa, and senior counsel Ravi B Naik resorting to a verbal duel. The counsel for Basha objected to some of the expressions used in the petition like ‘two bare-footed lawyers,’ ‘tools in the hands of rival party opponents’ and ‘instigating all Tom, Dick and Harry’.

Hanumantharayappa, objecting to the words used, said if a common man had committed the magnitude of offences that Yeddyurappa had committed, he would have been a rowdy-sheeter. “He is a habitual offender. Many people are waiting to lodge complaints. He is a rowdy-sheeter who has squandered public money,” the counsel said. Naik took strong objections to this and asked Basha’s counsel to mind his words. “It is known to whose tunes you are dancing,” he said.