<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed former chief minister H D Kumaraswamy and his wife Anitha to face trial for abusing position in granting lease to a mining company for lifting of one lakh metric tonnes of iron ore and allotment of 80 acres of land to a private cooperative society.<br /><br /></p>.<p>“Go and face the trial,” a bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant told senior advocate V Giri, representing the JD(S) leaders. The court also rejected their contention that the case was made out of political vendetta.<br /><br />“Of course, you are a political person. You will always say it. Merely because you were chief minister at one point of time does not mean that you would not face trial,” the bench told him.<br /><br />The court allowed a plea by advocate Nikhil Majithia, appearing for complainant-advocate M Vinod Kumar, against the Karnataka HC order of October 21, 2011, that has quashed the proceedings initiated against the couple by the Special Lokayukta Court on his complaint.<br /><br />“The HC ought not to have quashed the order against the accused and permitted the trial to continue. The allegations against them ought to have been adjudicated in the trial,” the bench said, setting aside the HC order.<br /><br />As Giri persistently denied any role of Kumaraswamy and Anitha, then a JD(S) MLA, in allotment of sites or lifting of iron ore, the bench said, “Should we record in our order that there is a letter of a government officer, who said the CM (Kumaraswamy) rang up the officer three times in a period of two hours threatening that you would be in difficulty, if you do not obey the order.” <br /><br />“How come Daya Nayak (referring to a Mumbai police officer known for his encounter) played a big role? Why you force us to record all these things in our order?” the bench further told the counsel.<br /><br />The bench, however, said they have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the allegations and all the defences of the accused would remain open. “The present case is not fit for quashing,” the bench said. <br /><br />The cases against Kumaraswamy and Anita relate to renewal of mining lease to Jantakal Mining Company, in violation of norms and irregularities in allotment of sites to Vishwabharathi Housing Cooperative Society, which had made a quid pro quo site allotment to Anitha, during Kumaraswamy's tenure as chief minister in 2006.<br /> <br /></p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed former chief minister H D Kumaraswamy and his wife Anitha to face trial for abusing position in granting lease to a mining company for lifting of one lakh metric tonnes of iron ore and allotment of 80 acres of land to a private cooperative society.<br /><br /></p>.<p>“Go and face the trial,” a bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant told senior advocate V Giri, representing the JD(S) leaders. The court also rejected their contention that the case was made out of political vendetta.<br /><br />“Of course, you are a political person. You will always say it. Merely because you were chief minister at one point of time does not mean that you would not face trial,” the bench told him.<br /><br />The court allowed a plea by advocate Nikhil Majithia, appearing for complainant-advocate M Vinod Kumar, against the Karnataka HC order of October 21, 2011, that has quashed the proceedings initiated against the couple by the Special Lokayukta Court on his complaint.<br /><br />“The HC ought not to have quashed the order against the accused and permitted the trial to continue. The allegations against them ought to have been adjudicated in the trial,” the bench said, setting aside the HC order.<br /><br />As Giri persistently denied any role of Kumaraswamy and Anitha, then a JD(S) MLA, in allotment of sites or lifting of iron ore, the bench said, “Should we record in our order that there is a letter of a government officer, who said the CM (Kumaraswamy) rang up the officer three times in a period of two hours threatening that you would be in difficulty, if you do not obey the order.” <br /><br />“How come Daya Nayak (referring to a Mumbai police officer known for his encounter) played a big role? Why you force us to record all these things in our order?” the bench further told the counsel.<br /><br />The bench, however, said they have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the allegations and all the defences of the accused would remain open. “The present case is not fit for quashing,” the bench said. <br /><br />The cases against Kumaraswamy and Anita relate to renewal of mining lease to Jantakal Mining Company, in violation of norms and irregularities in allotment of sites to Vishwabharathi Housing Cooperative Society, which had made a quid pro quo site allotment to Anitha, during Kumaraswamy's tenure as chief minister in 2006.<br /> <br /></p>
