Karnataka HC Stays Proceedings Against CM
BENGALURU: The Karnataka high court on Monday directed the Special Court for People’s Representatives, Bengaluru, to defer all proceedings against chief minister Siddaramaiah till a petition by the CM challenging the grant of sanction for his prosecution by governor Thaawarchand Gehlot was heard by the court on August 29.
A writ petition in the high court filed by Mr Siddaramaiah on Monday sought, among other reliefs, to quash the grant of sanction for his prosecution by governor Thaawarchand Gehlot on August 16 against him under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and also under Section 218 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Samitha, 2023 in connection with alleged irregularities in allotment of plots to his wife by the Mysore Urban Development Authority (Muda) in Mysuru city.
After hearing the CM’s writ petition, Justice M. Nagaprasanna said: “No injunction has been granted.” The high court directed the trial court not to initiate any precipitative action against Mr Siddaramaiah based on the sanction accorded by the governor.
The sanction to prosecute the CM was sanctioned by the governor on August 16 while it was communicated to the state chief secretary on August 17. Prior to the sanction by the governor, three petitions were filed with him by T.J. Abraham, Snehamayi Krishna and S.P. Pradeepkumar alleged irregularities in the distribution of plots to Parvathi, wife of chief minister Siddaramaiah. While giving sanction for the CM’s prosecution, the governor stated he was prima facie satisfied with the supporting documents submitted by the petitioners to him.
Challenging the grant of sanction to prosecute him by the governor, in his writ petition, the chief minister explained his wife Parvathi has been compensated for having lost her 3.16 acres in Kesare of Mysuru city by the Mysore Urban Development Authority (Muda) in Mysuru city in 2021 on compensatory mechanism adopted by Muda. Muda allotted his wife 38,284 sq ft in lieu of 1,48,104 sq ft of land lost by her owing to the infringement on her property by Muda.
The CM stated: “There is no legal infirmity or procedural irregularity in the compensation given by Muda to (my) wife Parvathi.”
He termed the sanction order by the governor as legally unsustainable, procedurally flawed and motivated by extraneous considerations. The CM’s petition said the sanction order of the governor was contrary to the constitutional principles by not going by the advice of the council of ministers in the Cabinet meeting held on August 1, wherein the governor was asked to withdraw the show-cause notice served on the CM. Under Article 13 of the Constitution, the advice of the council of ministers is binding on the governor.
Moreover, the CM said the governor addressed two letters on July 5 and July 15 to him and the chief secretary responded and submitted a detailed reply on July 26 to the letters of the governor. In the reply, the chief secretary refuted the politically motivated allegations.
Despite all factual matters being brought to his notice, the petition from the CM said the governor proceeded to grant sanction on August 16. Taking exception to the grant of sanction for prosecution, the chief minister’s petition stated the governor acted without due application of mind and in violation of statutory mandates and sought quashing of the governor’s order.