Bengaluru: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the Directorate of Enforcement, which had challenged the Karnataka High Court’s order quashing the ED notice issued to Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s wife, Parvathi B.M., and Urban Development Minister Byrathi Suresh in connection with the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case.
Chief Minister Siddaramaiah is the first accused in the case.
Expressing displeasure while looking into the appeal, Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai remarked that he, unfortunately, has some experience with such matters in Maharashtra. “Please do not force us to say something. Otherwise, we will have to make some very harsh remarks about the ED. Let political battles be fought among the electorate. Why are you allowing yourself to be used for this?” the bench questioned.
The bench further stated, “We do not find any error in the reasoning adopted by the single judge. In light of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we dismiss the petition. We should thank you, ASG, for helping us avoid making harsh comments.”
ASG S.V. Raju had submitted to the court that he would withdraw the petition and requested that this not be treated as a precedent.
Reacting to the development, the Chief Minister’s Office stated that justice has prevailed and the ED’s interference in the MUDA case has been brought to an end.
The ED had issued notices to CM Siddaramaiah’s wife, Parvathi B.M., and Minister Byrathi Suresh on alleged money laundering charges in connection with the MUDA scam.
The Karnataka High Court on March 7 had set aside the Enforcement Directorate’s summons to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s wife Parvathi B.M. and Minister Byrathi Suresh in connection with the MUDA site allotment case.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna delivered the verdict on petitions filed by Parvathi and Suresh challenging the ED’s action. The summons had earlier been put on hold by the court on January 27.
Parvathi’s counsel had argued that the ED was conducting a parallel investigation despite the case already being probed by the Lokayukta police and a Special Investigation Team (SIT).
Meanwhile, the Additional Solicitor General of India, Arvind Kamath, representing the ED, contended that Parvathi was the second accused in the predicate offence and had received proceeds of crime.
Minister Suresh’s counsel, Senior Advocate C.V. Nagesh, maintained that his client was not an accused in the case and therefore should not have been summoned.
In the MUDA site allotment case, it is alleged that 14 compensatory sites were allotted to Siddaramaiah’s wife in an upmarket Vijayanagar Layout 3rd and 4th stages in Mysuru city, which had a higher property value as compared to the location of her land, which had been “acquired” by MUDA.
The MUDA had allotted plots to Parvathi under a 50:50 ratio scheme in lieu of 3.16 acres of her land, where it developed a residential layout. Under the controversial scheme, MUDA allotted 50 per cent of developed land to the land losers in place of undeveloped land acquired from them for forming residential layouts.
It was alleged that CM Siddaramaiah misused his office as an Opposition leader, then as the Deputy Chief Minister and later as the Chief Minister to get the allotment of 14 sites.
(IANS)
