Siddaramaiah was behind the smoke screen for all benefits flown to his wife from MUDA: Karnataka High Court

High Court of Karnataka calls for investigation into Chief Minister Siddaramaiah's wife receiving 14 sites in Mysuru.

Observing that Chief Minister Siddaramaiah is “undoubtedly, behind the smoke screen for every benefit that has flown to his wife” in the form of 14 sites allotted to her in a posh locality in Mysuru, the High Court of Karnataka has said that how and why the rules were bent in favour of the family is what is required to be investigated.

“If this does not require investigation, I fail to understand what other case can merit investigation, as the beneficiary is the family of the petitioner [Mr. Siddaramaiah] and the benefit is by leaps and bounds, it is in fact a windfall,” Justice M. Nagaprasanna observed in his judgment on Tuesday.

All the allegations would require investigation in the least, for the reason that “if Mr. Siddaramaiah was not in the seat of power, helm of affairs, the benefit with such magnitude would not have flown,” the court said while pointing out that “it is unheard of for a common man to get these benefits in such quick succession bending the rule from time to time”.

The court pointed out that “Mr. Sidddaramaiah may not have put his signature, made a recommendation or taken a decision, for bringing him into the offence against him under the Act, but the beneficiary is not a stranger. The beneficiary of these acts is the wife of the petitioner. It is the open proclamation which is in the public domain by Mr. Siddaramaiah himself that if MUDA gives him ₹62 crore, he would give back the property”.

Therefore, the court said that “merely because the wife of the petitioner [Mr. Siddaramaiah] has indulged in all these acts, legal or illegal, the petitioner cannot be said to be completely ignorant of what is happening in the life of his wife, qua these factors. It, prima facie, depicts stretching of the arms of undue influence and portrays abuse of power of the seat of the Chief Minister or any other post held by Mr. Siddaramaiah”.

Stating that the denotification of three acres and 16 guntas of land acquired by the MUDA way back in 1992-1997 itself was illegal on the face of it, the court pointed out that rules for allotment of alternative sites were amended to benefit Parvathi, Mr. Siddaramaiah’s wife. But for amendment of rule, she was only entitled to two sites measuring 40x60 ft which would amount to 4,800 sq. ft for relinquishing more than three acres of land in terms of MUDA’s 1991 incentive scheme, which was in fact, quoted in the sale deeds of 14 sites registered in her favour.

“It shocks the conscience of the court as to how much is given to the petitioner as against 4,800 sq. ft, it is 38,284 sq. ft. Two sites become 14 sites. The wife of the petitioner is now the proud owner of 14 sites worth ₹56 crore,” the court observed.