Siddaramaiah gets relief as Karnataka HC rejects CBI probe in MUDA case

The Karnataka HC dismissed a plea for a CBI probe against CM Siddaramaiah in the MUDA case, affirming the Lokayukta's independence and ruling that its investigation is fair

The Karnataka High Court on Friday dismissed a petition seeking a CBI investigation into the alleged Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) scam involving Chief Minister Siddaramaiah. The court ruled that the Karnataka Lokayukta, which is already investigating the case, is independent and competent, making a transfer to the CBI unnecessary, reported Bar and Bench.

 

A single-judge bench led by Justice M Nagaprasanna stated that there was no reason to doubt the Lokayukta’s ability to conduct a fair investigation.

 

"The office of Lokayukta does not suffer from questionable independence to transfer the case to CBI. The insulation of Lokayukta from external influence is already recognised by the Supreme Court and High Court. There is no malady to direct CBI to investigate instead. CBI investigation is not a panacea to projected ills in petition," the court observed.

 

Dismissing the plea, the court further clarified that there was no evidence to suggest bias in the Lokayukta’s probe.

 

"The material on record does not indicate that Lokayukta’s investigation against Siddaramaiah is partisan, lopsided, or shoddy to direct a CBI probe. In result, the petition for CBI probe is dismissed," the judgment stated.

 

Case background

 

The case revolves around allegations that Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s wife, Parvathi, received inflated compensation for land in Mysuru. The land, originally acquired and later de-notified, was bought by her brother, Mallikarjuna Swamy, who then "gifted" it to her. The land was allegedly developed by MUDA, despite being privately owned.

 

Parvathi later sought compensation from MUDA, which allegedly awarded her 14 developed plots under a 50:50 scheme—significantly more valuable than the original three-acre land parcel.

 

Following multiple private complaints, including those by activists TJ Abraham, Snehamayi Krishna, and Pradeep Kumar SP, the Karnataka Governor granted sanction on July 26, 2024, to file a corruption case against Siddaramaiah. However, Siddaramaiah challenged this in the High Court, arguing that MUDA’s compensation decision was independent and not influenced by him.

 

On September 24, 2024, the High Court rejected his plea, and days later, the Karnataka Lokayukta filed an FIR against Siddaramaiah and three others, charging them with corruption, cheating, and forgery. This led activist Snehamayi Krishna to file the latest petition, seeking to transfer the case to the CBI—a plea now rejected by the court.

 

Arguments in court

 

Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, representing Krishna, argued that since the Lokayukta is a state agency, it might struggle to ensure an unbiased investigation against the Chief Minister. He contended that transferring the case to the CBI would instill public confidence.

 

Countering this, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the Karnataka government, argued that under Section 7 of the Lokayukta Act, the Lokayukta has the power to investigate public servants, including Chief Ministers. He added that a probe could only be transferred if there was evidence of malafide intent, which was absent in this case.

 

Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Siddaramaiah, also opposed Krishna’s plea. He pointed out that Krishna initially sought a probe by either the Lokayukta or the CBI but changed his stance immediately after the FIR was registered on September 27, 2024.

 

"Until the day the Lokayukta registered the FIR, the complainant had equal faith in both the Lokayukta and the CBI. But within an hour of the FIR, he changed his mind. How can that be done? He got what he wanted,” Singhvi argued.

 

Senior Advocates Ravi Varma Kumar and Aditya Sondhi, representing Siddaramaiah and his brother-in-law Mallikarjuna Swamy, also opposed the petition. Kumar further argued that the Chief Minister does not believe the CBI is an independent agency.