Why shouldn’t there be an investigation? ‘The common man has not received benefits like you’, what did the HC say to Siddaramaiah

Emphasizing the need to investigate the land allotment scam, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday (September 24, 2024) said that if Chief Minister Siddaramaiah was not in power, such a huge benefit would not have been available. The court was hearing Siddaramaiah’s petition. The court said that it is possible that he may not have signed or recommended due to fear of involvement in the crime, but his wife has got the benefit of this, which no common man could have got.

The High Court rejected Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s petition against the order of investigation given by Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot in connection with the scam. Thaawarchand Gehlot had allowed an investigation to be initiated against the Chief Minister in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) plot allotment scam, which Siddaramaiah had challenged in the High Court.

On Siddaramaiah’s plea, the court said that I don’t understand why there should not be an investigation. The judge said, ‘It is difficult to accept that the beneficiary for whom the compensation was fixed at Rs 3.56 lakh and it became Rs 56 crore is not the Chief Minister’s family. There is a need to investigate how and why the rules were changed for the Chief Minister’s family, if this also does not need investigation. If there is no need for investigation even after all this, then I don’t understand in which case the investigation should be done. The beneficiary is the petitioner’s family and the benefit received is huge. If the beneficiary was a stranger, the court would have opened the way out for the petitioner, but this is not the case.’

The court said, ‘… the court is of the considered opinion that this matter needs to be investigated, because if the petitioner was not in power, he would not have got such extensive benefits. Such benefits have never been received by any common man, nor can be received in the future.’ The order states that it is unheard of that a common man has got these benefits so quickly and the rules have been relaxed from time to time.

“Therefore, the petitioner may not have signed or made any recommendation or taken any decision in view of the apprehension of involvement of offence against him under the Act, but the beneficiary is not a stranger. The benefit of these acts has been received by the wife of the petitioner,” the judge said.

The High Court said, ‘It is an open declaration made by the petitioner himself in public that if MUDA gives him Rs 62 crore, he will return the property.’ The judge said that if it was a case of a common man, he would not have shied away from facing the investigation. The court said, ‘There is hidden doubt in it, big allegations have been made and the beneficiary of Rs 56 crore is the family of the Chief Minister (petitioner). From these aspects and on the basis of the above analysis, it is concluded that investigation is necessary.’

Regarding the allegations leveled against activist Abraham, who complained to the Governor against the Chief Minister, the court said that whistleblowers sometimes have to face such allegations. The court said that a lot is said about the criminal background of the third respondent (Abraham), while whatever has been said is contrary to the record. He said, ‘The presentation of the criminal background of the third respondent cannot cover up the real issue which he has placed before the Governor.’

Also read:-
The Indian woman who cried in America after seeing PM Modi had come from Delhi! Prashant Bhushan’s sensational claim