The Karnataka Excessive Courtroom on Wednesday rejected the Enforcement Directorate’s interim plea to remain a single-judge order quashing proceedings initiated towards Dr D B Natesh, a former commissioner of the Mysore City Improvement Authority (MUDA), beneath the Prevention of Cash-Laundering Act.
The ED had moved the division bench of Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice Okay V Aravind with a writ enchantment towards the January 27 order, which has a consequence on proceedings in its large-scale investigation of alleged cash laundering and wrongdoing in MUDA—together with land allotments made to CM Siddaramaiah’s household in 2021. The ED sought an interim keep to facilitate continuation of its investigations into the alleged MUDA rip-off.
The HC mentioned the difficulty of an interim keep is linked to the deserves of the case, which needs to be adjudicated after a full listening to of the case. Nevertheless, it said that the ED may perform investigations towards others concerned within the case. Supplies and property that had been seized by the ED however are usually not linked to the previous MUDA commissioner might be used to proceed the investigations, the courtroom added.
Order challenged by ED
On January 27, in a ruling with significance within the ED’s money-laundering probe towards Siddaramaiah, his spouse and others, a single-judge bench of the HC dominated that the company’s probe towards D B Natesh was unlawful.
The ruling got here after the previous MUDA commissioner, who headed the civic company in 2021 when 14 housing plots had been allotted to B M Parvathi, spouse of Siddaramaiah, approached the HC over an ED search operation performed at his residence from October 28 to October 29, 2024, beneath the PMLA.
The previous MUDA official questioned the ED’s actions towards him—together with the issuance of summonses dated October 29, 2024, and November 6, 2024, and the recording of his statements— when he was not accused within the predicate offence of alleged corruption registered by the Karnataka Lokayukta police towards Siddaramaiah, his spouse and others on September 28, 2024.
The HC dominated on January 27 that the searches performed on the residence of D B Natesh and statements recorded after the searches “beneath Part 17(1)(f) of PMLA, 2002, is vitiated on the grounds of absence of ‘purpose to consider”, and declared it “invalid and unlawful”.
Story continues under this advert
Because the former MUDA official isn’t accused within the predicate corruption offence, he can’t be anticipated to reveal any info over the alleged unlawful allotment of the 14 websites, the HC mentioned. It noticed that the ED “is anticipated to discharge its duties with equity” as a premier investigation company.
The courtroom famous that “the alleged predicate offence pertains to the unlawful allotment of websites throughout the petitioner’s tenure because the Commissioner of MUDA. Nevertheless, there isn’t any proof to exhibit that any consideration handed in relation to the conveyance or relinquishment of such websites was acquired by the petitioner.”
The HC noticed that the explanations for the cash laundering proceedings towards the previous MUDA commissioner supplied by the ED “within the sealed cowl signifies no particular allegation towards the petitioner, besides that of improper allotment of websites in favour of Smt B.M Parvathi, and that the petitioner is near realtors.”
The ED registered an Enforcement Case Info Report (ECIR) on October 1, 2024, based mostly on an FIR filed by the Lokayukta police on September 28, 2024, over the alleged unlawful allotment of 14 websites by MUDA in 2021 throughout the tenure of the BJP to the Congress chief’s spouse.
ED’s plea towards Lokayukta closure report
Story continues under this advert
The Lokayukta police have filed a closure report in its investigations of alleged corruption by the CM, his spouse and others within the grant of 14 MUDA websites to Siddaramaiah’s spouse in 2021, citing a scarcity of proof to show the corruption allegations.
The ED filed a protest plea towards the closure report in a particular courtroom on Tuesday even because the particular courtroom is scheduled on Thursday to resolve the protest petition filed by RTI activist Snehamayi Krishna, the unique complainant within the corruption case, towards the report.
The allotment of 14 housing websites by MUDA in trade for 3.16 acres of land acquired “wrongfully” by the civic company from Siddaramaiah’s spouse was alleged by Snehamayi Krishna to be an act of corruption involving a acquire of Rs 56 crore for the CM’s household.
Following the controversy over the allotment of the 14 housing websites final 12 months, the CM’s spouse returned the 14 housing websites to MUDA.
Story continues under this advert
The ED has provisionally hooked up 142 properties price Rs 300 crore in reference to its investigation into alleged large-scale irregularities in MUDA’s website allotments. Nevertheless, the properties of the CM’s household haven’t been hooked up by the ED.
The alleged irregularities within the MUDA allotments emerged final 12 months following Senhamayi Krishna’s allegation that Siddaramaiah’s household profited illegally from the 14 websites allotted to his spouse in 2021 in trade for 3.16 acres of land claimed to have been acquired wrongfully by MUDA.
Summonses to Siddaramaiah spouse and minister quashed
After the ED issued notices to Siddaramaiah’s spouse Parvathi and City Improvement Minister B S Suresha over the MUDA case in January this 12 months, the HC dominated on March 7 that there was no cash laundering in land allotments by MUDA to the CM’s household. The HC thus quashed the ED summonses to the CM’s spouse and the minister.
“The info as on the date of registration of ECIR is that the petitioner isn’t in possession, enjoyment and utilization of websites that had been allotted to her, as they’ve been surrendered and cancellation of allotment has occurred. Subsequently, there isn’t any laundering within the case at hand,” the HC dominated on the plea filed by Parvathi towards the ED summons.
Story continues under this advert
“As submitted by the realized Further Solicitor-Common, the Enforcement Directorate has discovered a bigger image of corruption and laundering in MUDA to which the current petitioner is not any means accountable. The knowledge gathered qua others might be taken ahead by the Enforcement Directorate in a way recognized to legislation,” the HC dominated in Parvathi’s ED case.
Within the case of Suresha, the HC dominated that the ED’s transfer to summon the minister when he was not linked to the MUDA land allotments was violative of his proper to life. The HC mentioned the minister “doesn’t even know what has occurred in MUDA. He comes into the image solely within the 12 months 2023.”
In its March 7 orders, the HC referred to the January 27 order to emphasize that a person can’t be compelled to present a press release in a PMLA case when no incriminating materials has been discovered towards them.
“The coordinate Bench holds that when there isn’t any prima facie case established displaying that an offence has been dedicated beneath the Act and no incriminating materials has been elicited on the time of search and seizure, issuance of summons would lack authorized authority and it was noticed that the petitioner couldn’t be compelled to look and provides assertion as that may infringe upon private proper and liberty of that petitioner,” the HC mentioned.