MUDA site scam: Karnataka High Court sends notices to Guv, complainants based on CM's appeals to dismiss cases

The bench issued notices to the office of the Governor of Karnataka and the complainants in the case filed against the Chief Minister, his wife Parvathy and others.

Bengaluru: The Karnataka high court on Thursday issued notices to the respondents for the writ appeals filed by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and original landowner Devaraju J in connection with the Mysuru Urban Development Corporation (MUDA) alternative sites allotment case. A division bench comprising Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravind adjourned the hearing to January 25, 2025.

The bench also issued notices to the office of the Governor of Karnataka, the complainants in the case filed against the Chief Minister, his wife Parvathy and others. Siddaramaiah has challenged the single bench order passed on September 24, dismissing his petition challenging the approval by Governor Taawarchand Gehlot to investigate against him for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Senior advocate Dushyant Dave submitted that the original land owner Devaraju, 80 years old, was not made a party in the proceedings before the single bench. The order of the single bench has made him face criminal prosecution, he said.

Dushyant Dave also mentioned the separate petition filed by Snehamayi Krishna, one of the complainants in the case, seeking a CBI probe. He prayed the division bench to grant a stay or to request the single bench to defer the hearing in the other petition filed by Snehamayi Krishna.

On the other hand, senior advocate KG Raghavan, appearing for Snehamayi Krishna, submitted that Devaraju can plead all the contentions before the single bench wherein the petition seeking for CBI probe is scheduled to come up for hearing on December 10, 2024.

Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Siddaramaiah, submitted that the procedures laid down under section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act has not been followed and the advice rendered by the state cabinet had been ignored by the Governor. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal represented the state government and said that some constitutional issues are involved in the case.

The division bench refused to pass an interim order deferring the proceedings before the single judge. The bench said that at the present juncture, it is not going into merits of the case and also interject or control proceedings in the other court.