Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court underlined the need for investigation into the alleged MUDA site allotment scam in which Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's wife is a beneficiary, saying that if the petitioner was not in the seat of power, the benefit of such magnitude would not have flown.
The court dismissed Siddaramaiah's petition challenging the permission granted by Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot to investigate him in the MUDA site allotment 'scam'.
The chief minister had challenged the sanction granted by the Governor in the alleged irregularities in the allotment of 14 sites to his wife by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) in a prime locality.
The Governor on August 16 gave his nod under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 218 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for the commission of the alleged offences as mentioned in the petitions submitted to him by complainants Pradeep Kumar S P, T J Abraham and Snehamayi Krishna.
"... in the considered view of the Court, would require investigation in the least, for the reason that if the petitioner was not in the seat of power, helm of affairs, the benefit of such magnitude would not have flown. It has never flown to any common man, nor can it, in future flow," the court observed.
The order said that it was unheard of for a common man to get these benefits in such quick succession, bending the rules from time to time.
"Therefore, the petitioner may not have put his signature, made a recommendation or taken a decision, for bringing him into the offence against him under the Act, but the beneficiary is not a stranger. The beneficiary of these acts is the wife of the petitioner," the judge observed.
"It is the open proclamation which is in public domain by the petitioner himself that if MUDA gives him Rs 62 crore, he would give back the property," the court noted.
It said, "Therefore, merely because the wife of the petitioner has indulged in all these acts, legal or illegal, the petitioner cannot be said to be completely ignorant of what is happening in the life of his wife, qua these factors."
It, prima facie, depicts stretching of the arms of undue influence and portrays abuse of power of the seat of the chief minister or any other post held by the petitioner, the order said.
The judge said that if this were to be a case of a common man, he would not have fought shy of facing the investigation.
"There is lurking suspicion, looming large allegations, and the beneficiary of Rs 56 crore, is the family of the chief minister - the petitioner. Judged from these spectrums and analyzed from the aforesaid premises, the irresistible conclusion is, an investigation becomes necessary," the court observed.
Regarding the allegations made against the activist Abraham, who had petitioned to the Governor against the chief minister, the court noted that whistleblowers would sometimes face such allegations.
Much is spoken about the criminal antecedents of the third respondent (Abraham), while all that has been contended are contrary to records, the judge pointed out.
"The submission of criminal antecedents of the third respondent cannot and can never mask the real issue that he has brought before the Governor," he said.
"Even otherwise, all the allegations are absolutely unfounded and deliberate mudslinging upon the third respondent. I deem it appropriate to observe that whistleblowers would sometimes face such allegations, particularly when they blow the whistle of corruption," the order said.