Karnataka High Court Extends Stay on ED Summons to CM Siddaramaiah's Wife
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Karnataka High Court has extended the stay on Enforcement Directorate summons issued to CM Siddaramaiah's wife, B.M. Parvathi, and Minister Byrathi Suresh in connection with the MUDA land scam, delaying further investigation until February 20.
Key Takeaways
- Karnataka High Court prolongs stay on ED summons.
- B.M. Parvathi is the second accused in the MUDA case.
- Investigation by ED is halted until further orders.
- Minister Byrathi Suresh argues summons are illegal.
- Judge questions urgency of ED's actions.
Dharwad (Karnataka), Feb 10 (NationPress) The Dharwad Bench of Karnataka High Court, led by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, has prolonged the stay on the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to B.M. Parvathi, wife of Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, and Minister for Urban Development, Byrathi Suresh, regarding the MUDA land scam case.
Parvathi is identified as the second accused in the MUDA matter, with CM Siddaramaiah being the primary accused.
The Bench, presided over by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, issued the ruling and postponed the case until February 20. The court has instructed the ED to refrain from continuing the investigation until further notice.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Arvind Kamat argued that the court should not intervene in the ED's issuance of summons to the accused parties, citing a Supreme Court order on this issue.
It was also raised that there is no stipulation requiring summons to be issued solely to the accused individuals.
The Solicitor General indicated that objections against the petitions from the CM's wife and Minister Suresh, challenging the summons against them, would be submitted within two to three days.
Senior counsel C.V. Nagesh, representing Minister Suresh, stated that there is no link between the allocation of 14 sites to the CM's family and his client. “Minister Suresh does not hold a position in MUDA. The summons issued to him is not legally justified,” he asserted.
The bench interjected at this point, inquiring about the specific portfolio held by Minister Suresh.
Counsel Nagesh confirmed his role in the Urban Development Ministry and further claimed that the ED's notice constituted a clear violation of his privacy. He pointed out that the ED has requested details about his family members and employees.
Additionally, it was noted that Minister Suresh's name is absent from the FIR and there exists no predicate offense.
Senior Counsel Sandeep Chowta, representing CM Siddaramaiah's wife Parvathi, argued that the 14 sites allocated by MUDA have been returned, negating any possibility of illegal financial recovery, thereby not warranting an ED investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The Bench had previously issued the stay order following a writ petition filed by the CM's wife and Minister Suresh on January 27.
The Bench questioned the urgency of the ED's actions, asking: “What is the tearing hurry?” while delivering the order.
Both Parvathi and Suresh have individually approached the court seeking relief and requesting a stay on the ED summons.
Sandeep Chowta, representing CM Siddaramaiah's wife, contended that the claims of illegal allocation of 14 sites against Parvathi did not involve any monetary gain. He urged for a stay on the ED's investigation against her.
The bench acknowledged that the illegal assets in question were no longer under the control of the accused.
It stressed that the ED's investigation should not disrupt the court's proceedings, which have already reserved their judgment in the MUDA case. The court had dismissed the petition requesting a CBI probe in the MUDA case.
