Supreme Court declines to hear stay plea against DKS

The Supreme Court on Friday declined to take up a plea for vacating the stay on the proceedings against Karnataka Minister D K Shivakumar for alleged corruption relating to denotification of land in Bangalore City.

A bench of Justices H L Dattu and S A Bobde declined to hear the application after senior advocate P Vishwanath Shetty, appearing for the Congress leader, submitted that a plea on whether the courts should stay the criminal proceedings in the cases under the Prevention of Corruption has been referred to a larger bench of the apex court and awaited adjudication.

B K Srinivasan had filed a complaint against Shivakumar in March 2012 and the Lokayukta court took cognisance of the offence in July 2012. The Karnataka High Court, which initially stayed the proceedings, vacated the interim order in April last year. On a special leave petition filed by Shivakumar, the apex court had stayed the proceedings. Now, Srinivasan has filed the application in the apex court seeking vacation of the stay.

“The order of stay passed by this court has ensured that criminal proceedings will not go on for years together…every citizen has a right to demand a corruption-free government and good democratic governance. It is this right that gets violated when criminal proceedings against corrupt public servants are stayed,” the applicant contended.

He submitted that Shivakumar, who was merely an MLA at the time of filing the special leave petition, was inducted into the Cabinet and the chief minister defended him on the basis of the stay granted by the apex court.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the complainant (applicant) sought direction for lifting the stay granted by the apex court in May last year, against the minister, who purchased 4 acres and 20 guntas of land in Bangalore for Rs 1.62 crore in 2003.
The applicant contended that the land use was changed from industrial to residential in 2004 and the land was denotified from acquisition in 2010 allegedly in violation of laws. The matter was adjourned to October 17.