B'luru court defers order on ED plea in MUDA scam
The case pertains to alleged irregularities in the allotment of sites by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA), in which CM Siddaramaiah has been accused of misusing his position.
PTI
-
The presiding judge Santosh Gajanan Bhat stated that a decision on the B Report would be taken only after the Lokayukta police submits the investigation report
BENGALURU, 15 APRIL
A special court for people’s
representatives here on Tuesday deferred its order on a petition filed by ED
against the ‘B Report’ filed by the Karnataka Lokayukta police in the MUDA land
allotment case.
The report has cleared Chief
Minister Siddaramaiah of wrongdoing. However, the Enforcement Directorate (ED)
and the complainant, activist Snehamaayi Krishna, have filed objections
challenging the report and demanded a deeper probe.
During the hearing, the presiding
judge Santosh Gajanan Bhat stated that a decision on the B Report would be
taken only after the Lokayukta police submits a complete investigation report.
As a result, the court adjourned
the proceedings and posted the next hearing for 7 May.
The court also granted the
Lokayukta police permission to continue its investigation, following a request
made by the agency.
Earlier, the Mysuru division of
the Lokayukta police had submitted an initial report based on its inquiry into
allegations against Siddaramaiah and three others.
However, the court observed that
the investigation should not be limited to just four individuals and directed
the police to probe all those involved and file a comprehensive report.
The case pertains to alleged
irregularities in the allotment of sites by the Mysuru Urban Development
Authority (MUDA), in which CM Siddaramaiah has been accused of misusing his
position.
The allegations suggest that
residential sites were allotted in violation of norms and procedures,
potentially benefiting certain individuals, including Siddaramaiah’s family
members.
The complaint filed by activist
Snehamaayi Krishna prompted the Lokayukta to initiate an investigation.
A ‘B Report’—essentially a
closure report indicating no evidence of wrongdoing—was later filed, stating
there was no sufficient material to prosecute the accused.
However, this report has now been
contested, with both the ED and the complainant arguing that crucial aspects of
the case were overlooked or insufficiently examined.
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *