Yeddyurappa has approached the court seeking to quash the lower court proceedings against him.

Senior counsel Jayakumar S Patil appearing for Yeddyurappa argued that the trial court had taken cognisance without holding any inquiry into the private complaints through investigation agencies. He said the complaint averments were beyond the scope of the sanction accorded. “Charges such as forgery, cheating, creating fake documents and few others under the IPC have been registered and the court has wrongly taken cognisance of those charges too,” the advocate argued. Justice B S Patil adjourned the matter to Monday.

Emergent notice
The High Court has ordered emergent notice to the State Government and Mangalore Port Trust (MPT) in a petition challenging the levy of penalty for not dispatching the iron ore stocked in the port.

Bhairavi Exports had challenged the levy of penalty of Rs 71 lakh for not dispatching the iron ore stocked in the port stating that they were unable to dispatch the order on account of the deputy commissioner’s order not to move the ore until further orders. The order was issued following the Supreme Court guidelines.

Appointment of KMF MD
The High Court has directed the Karnataka Milk Federation to appoint an eligible person as its Managing Director. Ramalingegowda, the suspended Managing Director of the Federation had challenged his suspension terming it illegal and arbitrary. He had contended that his suspension had no concurrence from the National Dairy Development Board and the Union Government. He had also questioned the appointment of a new managing director claiming that the KMF Act provides for only one MD. His petition was allowed. Following some Board resolutions against him passed on August 17, 2011, Gowda moved an application seeking a stay on the resolutions.

Justice H V G Ramesh, however, directed the Federation to hand over the position to the next eligible person and not to precipitate the matter.

‘All denotifications are not offences under Prevention of Corruption Act’
The advocate for former chief minister B S Yeddyurappa on Friday contended before the Lokayukta special court that every act of denotification cannot be constructed as an offence under Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA).

Advancing arguments in the bail petition of Yeddyurappa, senior counsel Ravi B Naik contended that drawing conclusions from the complaint would affect the course of the trial. “We are yet to reach a stage where materials have been placed. Once that dent is made on the reputation, it is not possible to remove it,” he said. Naik argued that the complaint had several loopholes and its contents have to be taken with a pinch of salt.
Naik who also represents Yeddyurappa’s two sons and son-in-law, said they were independent entities who took their own decisions. “It is easy to say they benefited from the transactions, but where is the proof of it?” he said.

It will be a busy day at the Special Lokayukta Court as four high profile cases are scheduled to be heard on Saturday.

The Court will be taking up Katta Subramanya Naidu’s fresh bail application on health grounds, followed by arguments on the bail application of Yeddyurappa. A private complaint filed against H D Kumaraswamy is scheduled for hearing while another complaint against Deve Gowda’s eldest son, H D Balakrishna Gowda is also posted for Saturday.