Justice M Nagaprasanna ruled that there was no evidence to suggest that the ongoing investigation by Lokayukta police was unfair or compromised.
The Karnataka high court on Friday refused to transfer the investigation into alleged irregularities in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) site allotment case, involving chief minister Siddaramaiah’s wife Parvathi, to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and said the case will continue to be handled by the Lokayukta police.
Dismissing the petition seeking a CBI probe, Justice M Nagaprasanna ruled that there was no evidence to suggest that the ongoing investigation was unfair or compromised. “There is no malady of the kind that is projected by the apex court present in this case to refer the matter for further investigation or reinvestigation into the hands of the CBI. It is not a panacea for the projected ill,” the court stated, adding that the Lokayukta police’s inquiry showed no signs of bias or inefficiency.
The plea seeking a CBI probe was filed by Mysuru-based activist Snehamayi Krishna, who argued that an independent investigation was necessary given Siddaramaiah’s position as CM. The petition contended that state agencies, including the police and the Lokayukta, could not conduct an impartial probe due to the CM’s significant influence over administrative and investigative bodies. The activist’s legal team further argued that a fair probe was essential to maintaining public confidence in the judicial process.
The Karnataka government opposed the request, asserting that transferring the probe to the CBI was unwarranted. Legal representatives for the state pointed out that the Supreme Court had laid down specific conditions under which a case could be handed over to an independent agency, none of which applied in this matter.
Appearing for the state, senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the Lokayukta Act grants the agency full authority to investigate a sitting chief minister. Handing over the case to the CBI, Sibal said, would render the Lokayukta’s powers meaningless.
The CM’s legal counsel highlighted that Krishna had initially sought an investigation by the Lokayukta police and later sought a CBI probe without presenting any grounds to question the Lokayukta’s impartiality. They contended that a complainant does not have the right to choose the investigating agency and that an inquiry cannot be transferred solely because it involves a high-ranking political figure.
Recommended Topics
