Setback to CM Siddaramaiah as HC upholds Guv''s order, dismisses his plea

CM Siddaramaiah rejected the opposition's demand for his resignation. "I still say I have done no wrong," he said

The Karnataka High Court (HC) on Tuesday dismissed chief minister Siddaramaiah’s petition challenging the Governor Thawar Chand Gehlot's approval for investigation against him in a land allotment case, in a major setback to the 76-year-old leader.

Opposition party Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and its ally, Janata Dal (Secular), have demanded Siddaramaiah’s immediate resignation so that these allegations could be probed impartially.

Addressing reporters, Siddaramaiah accused the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government at the Centre of indulging in vendetta politics against Opposition-ruled state governments. He alleged a “conspiracy” and “misuse of Raj Bhavan” by the BJP and JD (S).

He asserted that the BJP had resorted to the latest ploy after failing to dislodge his government through ‘Operation Kamala’.

"I still say I have done no wrong,” Siddaramaiah said.

The CM rejected the Opposition's demand for resignation

“(But) at the inquiry stage itself resignation is sought?” he asked.

Siddaramaiah said all ministers, including Deputy CM DK Shivakumar, party legislators and the Congress’ central leadership will support him.

“The (Congress) High Command will cooperate with me in continuing the legal fight," he said.

In May 2023, the Congress central leadership mediated between him and Shivakumar before he took the oath of office.

The CM had challenged the sanction granted by Governor Gehlot for an investigation against him in the alleged irregularities in the allotment of 14 sites to his wife, B M Parvathi, by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) in a prime locality.

On August 16, the Governor gave his nod under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), 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.

On August 19, Siddaramaiah moved HC challenging the legality of the Governor's order.

Justice M Nagaprasanna ruled that the “the facts narrated in the petition would undoubtedly require investigation” since the beneficiary is not anybody outside but the family of the petitioner.

The Governor under normal circumstances has to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers as obtained under the Article 163 of the Constitution, the judge said, "but (the Governor) can take independent decisions in exceptional circumstances, and the present case projects one such exception.”

The judge, however, said that the order is read to be restrictive to an approval under Section 17A of the PCA and not an order granting sanction under Section 218 of BNSS.

Siddaramaiah, and other Congress leaders, argued that the judge confined the decision to Section 17 (A) of the PCA, but “explicitly dismissed the prosecution sanction under Section 218 of BNSS. In due course, the investigation under Section 17 (A) will also reveal these to be false allegations,” Karnataka’s IT minister Priyank Kharge posted on X.

Siddaramaiah added that he will decide on his subsequent course of action after consulting legal experts and party leaders.