MUDA case | Setback for Siddaramaiah as court orders Lokayukta police to continue probe

The court also deferred its order on activist Snehamayi Krishna’s plea questioning 'B-Report' filed by Lokayukta police in MUDA case.

Bengaluru: A special court for elected representatives on Tuesday permitted the Lokayukta police to conduct further investigation into the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) sites allotment scam in its entirety, particularly with respect to the loss caused to the authority in allotting sites on 50:50 ratio to Parvathi BM, wife of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, and all others.

“The question of considering the acceptance or rejection of ‘B’ Final Report filed by the Investigating Agency, is kept pending till filing of the conclusive final report by the Investigating Agency,” special court judge Santosh Gajanan Bhat said.

The Lokayukta police had filed a closure ‘B’ report stating that there are no materials to justify the allegations leveled against the Chief Minister, his wife, her brother Mallikarjuna Swamy and original land owner Devaraju J (accused 1-4) in the allotment of 14 sites in favour of Parvati.

However, in that closure report, the Lokayukta police had stated that such allotment of sites on 50:50 ratio by D B Natesh and his predecessors as MUDA commissioners had caused huge loss to the government exchequer.

The Lokayukta police had sought permission of the court to conduct further investigation into these acts of the officials.

“Since the Investigating Agency has sought the permission of the Court to conduct further investigation, this court is of the opinion that the outcome of the further investigation should be considered along with the report now filed by the Investigating Agency wherein accused No 1 to 4 are exonerated from the charges leveled against them. Without expressing any opinion on merits, it would be appropriate to consider the acceptance or rejection of ‘B’ report on the basis of the further investigation materials, if any, filed by the I.O. (Investigating Officer). By considering the enormous passage of time, it would be appropriate to direct strictly the Investigating Agency to conclude the further investigation and to furnish the final Report on or before the next date of hearing,” the special court said, posting the matter to May 5.

The case pertains to the private complaint filed by one Snehamayi Krishna alleging that Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and other accused have indulged in illegalities with respect to the purchase of lands measuring 3.16 acres (survey number 464) and 37 guntas (survey number 462) of Kesare village, Mysuru Taluk and denotifying them. Subsequently, this land was gifted by Mallikarjuna Swamy to Parvati and later obtained 14 compensatory sites from MUDA in up market Vijayanagar 3rd and 4th stages in Mysuru by exerting pressure on the government officials.

In his protest petition against the B closure report, Snehamayi Krishna argued that the role of accused 1-4 cannot be decimated from the role of the MUDA officials. He claimed that if the acts of D B Natesh and his successors had incurred loss to the exchequer, then it would fortify his case that the allotment of 14 sites was illegal. The Lokayukta police have claimed that 1055 sites were allotted by MUDA and if this contention is accepted, the extent of economic loss caused to the government exchequer was massive, the complainant said.

On the other hand, the advocate for the Lokayukta police submitted that the investigating officer has only completed investigation with respect to four accused and that there was certainly loss caused to MUDA due to allotment of sites on 50:50 ratio.

ED an aggrieved party

Meanwhile, the special court has also said that Enforcement Directorate (ED), which too had filed a protest petition against the B closure report, is also considered as aggrieved person for a limited extent. Objecting to ED’s intervention, the Lokayukta police had argued that the court cannot permit ED to enter into the shoes of the complainant nor any documents can be produced by them prior to deciding the locus-standi of the ED authorities.

The court said ED can be considered as aggrieved persons as the final outcome of the investigation could have an impact on the allied money laundering offence which is being probed by the ED. “However, with respect permitting them to file a protest petition is not considered at this moment by this court since the court is not passing any order with respect to acceptance or otherwise of the rejection of the ‘B’ final report since the Investigating Agency have requested permission to conduct further investigation,” the court said.