The Karnataka High Court on Thursday issued notices to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, the Lokayukta police and the Enforcement Directorate in response to a petition challenging the closure of the corruption case against him, his wife BM Parvathi and two others in the Mysore Urban Development Authority land allotment matter.
The notices were issued by Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav while hearing a petition filed by activist Snehamayi Krishna, who is also the complainant in the case. Krishna has questioned the January 28 decision of a special court in Bengaluru, which accepted the Lokayukta police’s closure report.
The case revolves around alleged irregularities in land allotments by MUDA. According to the complaint, Siddaramaiah is accused of misusing his official position to benefit his wife.
It is alleged that Parvathi received a plot of land from her brother, which had been developed by MUDA in violation of rules. After raising a complaint and seeking compensation, she was reportedly granted compensation that was significantly higher in value, including 14 developed alternate plots in exchange for the original three acres.
In July last year, the Karnataka Governor granted permission to prosecute Siddaramaiah in the case. The Chief Minister challenged this decision, but his plea was rejected by the High Court in September 2024.
Following this, the Lokayukta police registered a case against Siddaramaiah, Parvathi, his brother in law Mallikarjuna Swamy and landowner J Devaraj. Former MUDA commissioners GT Dinesh Kumar and DB Natesh, along with realtor Manjunath, were also named as accused.
Later, the Lokayukta police submitted a report stating that there was insufficient evidence to establish corruption charges against Siddaramaiah, his wife and the other named individuals. The special court accepted this report on January 28, observing that the evidence gathered did not support charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act or related provisions of the Indian Penal Code. However, it allowed the investigation to continue against some of the other accused.
In his petition, Krishna argued that the special court treated the matter as a routine dispute and failed to acknowledge the seriousness of allegations involving misuse of a constitutional position. He claimed that the court relied heavily on the Lokayukta’s findings without conducting an independent evaluation.
The plea also highlighted what it described as inconsistencies in the court’s order, noting that while the closure report was accepted for certain accused, the court simultaneously acknowledged irregularities and ordered further investigation against others.
Krishna has requested the High Court to transfer the investigation to an independent agency and to order a fresh probe under the supervision of a retired High Court judge.
The petition also referred to the earlier High Court ruling in September 2024, which upheld the Governor’s sanction to prosecute Siddaramaiah and called for a detailed investigation into the circumstances under which the rules appeared to favour his family.
