Land denotification case: SC junks Kumaraswamy's plea against criminal proceedings

New Delhi: In a jolt to Union Minister H D Kumaraswamy, the Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed his plea against the High Court's 2020 refusal to quash the proceedings related to denotification of two different plots of land acquired by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), during his tenure as the Karnataka Chief Minister between June 2006 and October 2007 allegedly for pecuniary gains.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Rajesh Bindal refused to consider a plea by the petitioner led by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi and advocate Balaji Srinivasan, claiming no prior sanction was taken for initiation of criminal proceedings.

Kumaraswamy contended in view of the amendment made in Section 19(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act in 2018, a sanction was required even though he was not holding the office at the time when the cognisance was taken. His counsel further submitted that without obtaining the sanction under Section 19, no cognisance ought to have taken, and the High Court committed an error in rejecting the petition filed under Section 482 CrPC.

Senior advocate Harin P Raval, and Additional Advocate General Aman Pawar, appearing for the Karnataka government, contended the petitioner has not furnished the complete order in the petition before the court seeking to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution.

The state government said the petitioner claimed his plea was dismissed by a non-speaking order, though the order running into more than 20-page was not furnished.

The council also contended no protection of sanction can be extended to the petitioner as he has ceased to hold the office of the Chief Minister. They also submitted that 2018 amendment cannot be used to seek protection for the acts committed before the provision came into force.

The court finally rejected the contention by the petitioner and upheld the High Court's order, having noted the seriousness of the allegations and misuse of the office of the Chief Minister.

The bench had earlier questioned as to how he could claim protection under 2018 amendment to the Prevention of Corruption Act related to mandatory prior approval for prosecuting a public servant for his acts committed prior to the change in law.

The apex court had in 2021 issued notice limited to the question as to whether without sanction the special judge could have taken cognisance of a complaint under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Kumaraswamy assailed the High Court's refusal to quash the corruption case related to denotification of two plots at Halagevaderahalli village, Uttarahalli hobli, in Bangalore South.

On September 4, 2019, the Special Court directed registration of the criminal case against Kumaraswamy and others and issued summons against all the accused persons in the complaint filed in 2012 by M S Mahadeva Swamy. The High Court had on October 9, 2020, declined to quash the summons or the proceedings.

It was alleged Kumaraswamy, during his tenure as the CM, had on October 3, 2007, approved the notification de-notifying the lands, causing losses to the Exchequer.