MUDA Case: Petitioner Files Appeal Against CBI Probe Quash Order

Bengaluru, March 4 (NationPress) In a significant turn of events concerning the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case involving Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, petitioner Snehamayi Krishna has submitted an appeal writ petition to the division bench of the Karnataka High Court, contesting the single bench's decision to quash his appeal for a CBI investigation into the MUDA case.

This appeal was lodged on Tuesday, coinciding with the ongoing budget session, and is perceived as a setback for CM Siddaramaiah, who is preparing to present the budget on March 7.

The petition requests the annulment of the order issued on February 7 by the single judge.

"Grant any other or further relief/s to the Appellant which this Hon’ble High Court deems fit and thinks proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, to serve the ends of justice," the petition further insists.

The petitioner has indicated in the appeal that he reserves the right to contest the closure report issued by the Lokayukta in the relevant court and does not challenge the closure report in the current proceedings.

The appeal includes the Union government, the State of Karnataka, the Director of CBI, the SP of CBI, the Karnataka Lokayukta SP in Mysuru, the Karnataka DGP, the ADGP of Lokayukta, and the inspector of Vijayanagar police station as parties.

Siddaramaiah is listed as the ninth respondent, his wife B.M. Parvathi as the tenth, brother-in-law Mallikarjunaswamy as the eleventh, and landowner D. Devaraju as the twelfth respondent. In the MUDA scam, Siddaramaiah is identified as the first accused, with his wife as the second, Mallikarjunaswamy as the third, and Devaraju as the fourth.

The memorandum of the writ appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 in conjunction with Rule 27 of the High Court Writ Proceedings Rules 1977.

This appeal has been filed through Vasantha Kumara and Associates, located in Kumara Park West, Bengaluru.

The petition asserts that the Learned Single Judge made significant errors in formulating questions that were never raised or argued before the court. The Appellant did not question the credibility of the Lokayukta; rather, it is due to Respondent No.9 (Siddaramaiah)'s influence over state machinery that the entire investigation is likely biased, failing to instill confidence in the public or the complainant.

The petition further states: "The learned single judge neglected to recognize that the documents attached to the writ petition sufficiently demonstrate that Respondent No.9 has consistently abused the trust bestowed upon him to achieve personal objectives with the assistance of family and MUDA officials."

Additionally, the petition claims that Respondent No.9 has a history of criminal behavior with various allegations, including misusing his office to assist his son in obtaining a contract at BMRCI to establish a diagnostic center and de-notifying 541 acres of land acquired for the Arkavathy Layout, allegedly receiving bribes. Furthermore, he is accused of issuing a mining license to a company in violation of established rules.

However, no investigations have been conducted by any agency to ascertain the veracity of these claims, with numerous cases against him closed inexplicably. These facts suggest that Respondent No.9 is a powerful individual with significant influence in the bureaucracy, insulating him from any fair investigation, according to the petitioner.

"The Respondent No. 9, currently serving as the Chief Minister of Karnataka, wields substantial authority over all aspects of state administration, including the investigation of offenses. Furthermore, the State government, via its Order dated 31.08.2024, issued by the Under Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, suspended Sri. G T Dinesh Kumar, KAS, due to involvement in the MUDA misappropriation," the petition elaborates.

Importantly, the Writ Court acknowledged that a thorough investigation is warranted based on the connections of events, emphasizing that the law appears to favor the wife of Respondent No 9 (Siddaramaiah), as the site allocations as compensation seem contrary to legal standards, as highlighted in the petition.

In a significant relief for Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, the Dharwad Bench of the Karnataka High Court, presided over by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, quashed a petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case.

After reviewing arguments from both sides, the court had reserved its decision on January 27.