On Friday, the Lokayukta police filed a First Information Report (FIR) against Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah for suspected misconduct in the allocation of sites by Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA).
According to the report by news agency PTI, Siddaramaiah, along with his wife BM Parvathi, brother-in-law Mallikarjun Swamy, and Devaraj are named in the FIR. Mallikarjuna Swamy bought land from Devaraj and then gave it as a gift to Parvathi.
The decision was made the day after a court specifically located in Bengaluru instructed the Lokayukta police to investigation into allegations towards Siddaramaiah allegations of misconduct in allocation of 14 plots valued at ₹56 million to the wife of the prime minister by the progress of Mysuru power.
The specific court for ex and present MPs/MLAs criminal cases instructed Lokayukta police in Mysuru to start probing a complaint from RTI activist Snehamayi Krishna.
The court ordered an investigation to be carried out under section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which allows a magistrate to initiate an investigation into a cognisable offense. It further instructed the police to submit the investigation report.
On December 24th, the court ordered the Superintendent of Police at Karnataka Lokayukta in Mysuru to register a case, conduct an investigation, and submit a report within 3 months, as stated in Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code, under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
HC’s blow to Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah
The directive followed the Karnataka high court’s confirmation of Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot’s approval to probe Siddaramaiah in the matter.
In delivering the verdict, Justice M Nagaprasanna, the judge sitting alone, observed that the Governor’s decision on August 17 to approve the investigation and permission for “prosecution of the Chief Minister in MUDA” was not made quickly. The court also noted that the complainants were right to file the complaint and request permission from the Governor.
What does the Muda case?
It is claimed that in the MUDA site allotment case, Siddaramaiah’s wife was given compensatory sites in a prime area of Mysuru, which is more valuable than her original land taken by MUDA.
The MUDA gave Parvathi plots as part of a 50:50 plan in return for 3.16 acres of her land, which was used for a residential area development.
In this contentious plan, MUDA gave landowners 50% of the developed land instead of undeveloped land acquired for residential layouts. It has been claimed that Parvathi did not possess lawful ownership of the 3.16 acres of land situated at survey number 464 in Kasare village, Kasaba hobli of Mysuru taluk.
The Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah denied the accusations, stating that the land transaction adhered to regulations and was free of any discrepancies. He had also rejected the demand from the Opposition for him to step down, which became more vocal following the court’s decision to pursue a case against him.