Chief Minister Siddaramaiah files appeal in Karnataka High Court against order upholding governor’s sanction in MUDA case

Chief Minister Siddaramaiah has filed an appeal in the Karnataka High Court against an order that upheld Governor Thaawar Chand Gehlot’s decision granting sanctions for investigation/prosecution against the CM in connection with the alleged multi-crore ‘scam’ the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA).

The appeal seeks to stay the implementation of the September 24 order issued by the single-judge court by way of interim measures.

A single judge bench composed of Judge M. Nagaprasanna while dismissing the petition filed by Siddaramaih, he observed that the complainants were justified in registering the complaint or seeking the governor’s approval.

The bench further said that it is the duty of the complainant to seek approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the governor can take independent decisions.

He had observed “The facts narrated in the petition would undoubtedly require investigation, despite the fact that the beneficiary of all the acts is no outside person but the petitioner’s family. The petition is rejected.”

Regarding the application of Section 17A of the PC Act, the court, while passing the order, said: “Approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act is mandatory considering the facts and situation. Section 17A nowhere requires a police officer to seek approval of a private complaint registered under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or Section 220 of the BNSS against a public servant. It is the duty of the complaint to seek such approval“.

As to whether the governor must consider the aid and advice of the council of ministers in passing such an order, the court said: “In normal circumstances, the governor must act with the aid and advice of the council of ministers, but can take independent decisions in exceptional circumstances and the present case provides for such an exception. No fault can be found in the act that the governor exercises independent discretion to adopt the It would be sufficient for the reasons to be mentioned in the record of the decision-making authority, particularly of the high office, and for these reasons to be succinctly part of the order A reservation, the reasons. must appear in the file, the reasons for the first time cannot be brought before the Constitutional Court by objections.

The High Court further said that the Governor’s sanction order did not suffer from any “non-application of mind”. He added that it was not an appearance of lack of application of mind, but rather “abundant application of mind.”

It was also observed that grant of opportunity of personal hearing is not mandatory under Section 17A of the PC; if the authority chooses to do so, it is open to it.

“The Governor’s decision on the alleged haste did not vitiate the order, the order is restrictive to approval under section 17A of the Act and not to an order granting sanction under section 218 of the BNSS.“, added the court.

Following the order, the Lokayukta police filed a case against him.

Case Title: Siddaramaiah AND State of Karnataka and others.

Case No. WA 1569/2024.