DA case against DKS: HC extends interim stay against CBI probe

The petition filed by Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar in the disproportionate assets case has been referred to the Chief Justice for posting it before the appropriate bench. Meanwhile, Justice M Nagaprasanna also extended the interim order of stay in the matter.

The CBI had registered a case against Shivakumar and his family members alleging disproportionate assets. The FIR stated that during the check period between April 1, 2013 and April 30, 2018, Shivakumar and his family members were in possession of Rs 74.93 crore disproportionate assets, which has not been explained with proper documents.

Also Read | In meeting with DKS, ex-mayors propose revival of task force

In his petition, Shivakumar had stated that the CBI was causing mental stress by issuing repeated notices. It was also submitted that along with Shivakumar, his wife and daughter were also served with notices by the investigating agency. According to the petitioner, the CBI could not have initiated coercive measures against him in view of the earlier order of the high court.

The matter was listed before the bench presided over by Justice Nagaprasanna, who is the designated judge at the high court for cases arising from Special Court for public representatives (MPs/MLAs). It was submitted before the court that the matter was marked as part-heard as it was extensively heard before the previous judge (Justice K Natarajan).

Meanwhile, P Prasanna Kumar, special counsel for the CBI, submitted that the agency had filed an interlocutory application for vacating the stay on investigation granted on February 10, 2023. He further stated that the previous designated judge had expressed that the matter should go before the appropriate bench as the roster has been changed.

However, on perusal of the earlier orders passed in the case, Justice Nagaprasanna said that it is expressly indicated that the matter was part-heard. The court said that the previous judge may have observed that the matter should be listed before the roster bench, but there is no order releasing the matter from the part-heard category. The court directed the registry to take necessary steps to place it before the Chief Justice for appropriate orders.