The Special Lokayukta Court had issued summons to Yeddyurappa and 14 others in a private complaint alleging illegal denotification of land. All the 15 accused will have to appear before the court on Saturday.
Advocate Sirajin Basha had filed five complaints against Yeddyurappa and others, and the summons were issued in the second complaint.
While the High Court on Friday reserved its order on a petition by Yeddyurappa seeking anticipatory bail, the Special Lokayukta Court posted the hearing on the anticipatory bail plea of JD(S) leader Kumaraswamy and his wife Anita Kumaraswamy for Saturday.
The marathon hearing in the High Court on Yeddyurappa’s plea on anticipatory bail concluded on Friday evening, with Justice L Narayanaswamy rejecting his prayer for interim relief. Summons were earlier issued for his appearance before the Lokayukta Court on Saturday.
Appearing for Yeddyurappa, Supreme Court senior counsel U U Lalit argued that the entire episode against the former chief minister was a political battle. He contended that the governor’s sanction was accorded under Section 13(1)(d) and 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, which was actually a sanction for action against possessing assets disproportionate to the known source of income.
Counsel for Sirajin Basha, C H Hanumantharaya said the complaints against Yeddyurappa and the documents gathered were strong. He said the petitioner’s apprehension of arrest was unwarranted.
“Why is the petitioner hypersensitive of being arrested? It has just taken cognizance. He should not have come here. He should have gone to the trial court as there are facilities there and can be exempted from appearing,” Hanumantharaya said.
Hanumantharaya added, “There are all documents and complaints over there. Moreover, he can either appear through counsel or appear in person. It is left to him.” He submitted that if granted bail, the petitioner might tamper with witnesses and the evidence.
The Special Lokayukta Court on Friday adjourned the hearing of the anticipatory bail plea filed by Kumaraswamy and his wife Anita Kumaraswamy to Saturday. Their counsel, Hashmath Pasha explained that since the summons had been issued, the couple was apprehensive as it was a non -offence and they could be arrested. He said they had been “restless” ever since the summons were issued and they were entitled to enjoy their life without apprehension of being arrested.
Further, he argued that Kumaraswamy was considered to be behind the private complaints that were filed against Yeddyurappa and the latter had directed the sub registrars to dig out nformation against Kumaraswamy and some of this information were clearly not based on fact.
On Anita Kumaraswamy being allotted a site by Vishwabharathi Housing Cooperative Society, the counsel said that contrary to the claims of the complainant, Anita was a member of the society and the site was given to her after she paid for the site in four installments amounting to Rs 7.25 lakh.
The application for the site was made on the behest of Anita’s father and the payment and the allocation were made in 2005, when Kumaraswamy had not become the Chief Minster, the counsel contended.
