MUDA site allotment scam: Special court hears objections to probe report against CM Siddaramaiah

Bengaluru: The investigation report submitted in the controversial MUDA (Mysuru Urban Development Authority) site allotment scam involving Chief Minister Siddaramaiah came under sharp scrutiny on Wednesday, as the Special Court for People’s Representatives held a detailed hearing on objections raised by complainant Snehamayi Krishna.

During the proceedings, the complainant strongly questioned the findings and conclusions of the investigating agency, arguing that the final report failed to comply with both legal principles and earlier judicial directions.

Senior counsel appearing for Snehamayi Krishna contended that the report itself refers to as many as 132 separate cases related to alleged irregular site allotments. The counsel argued that the investigating agency had acknowledged in its own report that these cases warranted separate FIRs and independent investigations.

However, he objected to the agency’s decision to file a B-report (closure report) for one part of the case while simultaneously proceeding with charges in another part. “There is no provision in law to split a single set of allegations in this manner—filing a B-report for half the issues and a charge sheet for the remaining,” the complainant’s counsel submitted, terming the approach legally untenable.

Reference to High Court observations

During arguments, the complainant referred to earlier observations made by the Karnataka High Court. When Siddaramaiah, listed as Accused No.1, had approached the High Court seeking relief, the court had observed that there appeared to be sufficient material warranting investigation, the complainant pointed out.

However, the Special Court judge clarified that those observations were made only at a prima facie stage, while ordering investigation. “The High Court’s observation was based on preliminary material available at that time. The present hearing must be confined to the contents and conclusions of the investigation report now submitted,” the judge remarked, directing the parties to focus their arguments accordingly.

Allegation of deviation from court directions

Snehamayi Krishna expressed strong dissatisfaction with the manner in which the probe was conducted. He alleged that the investigating officers had acted contrary to the spirit and intent of the court’s order that had mandated a thorough and fair investigation into serious allegations of irregularities in MUDA site allotments.

“The court ordered investigation after taking note of grave aspects. Instead of addressing those concerns, the investigators have diluted the case by submitting a B-report. This report deserves to be rejected outright,” the complainant urged, alleging procedural lapses and selective assessment of evidence.

The complainant also questioned whether the investigating agency had examined all beneficiaries, officials and decision-making processes involved in the alleged irregular allotments, as required under law.

Next hearing on January 13

After hearing preliminary submissions from both sides, the Special Court adjourned the matter to January 13, when detailed arguments are expected on the petitions challenging the B-report. The outcome of the next hearing is expected to be crucial, as it could determine whether the court accepts the closure report, orders further investigation, or directs registration of additional FIRs.

With the case drawing sustained political and legal attention, the proceedings are being closely watched to see whether Chief Minister Siddaramaiah secures relief or faces further legal complications in the MUDA allotment controversy.

Also Read: Udupi on alert as monkey deaths spark fears of monkeypox outbreak