Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah faced a significant setback on Tuesday as the Karnataka High Court quashed his petition against Governor Thawar Chand Gehlot. This judgment clears the way for the prosecution of the chief minister in the alleged Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) land allocation case.
The High Court presided over by Justice M Nagaprasanna, delivered its judgment and stated that the decision to dismiss the CM’s plea was based on independent judicial consideration. “The order does not suffer from non-application of mind but rather demonstrates an abundance of application of mind. There is no fault in the Governor’s actions. The facts narrated require investigation. The petition stands dismissed,” the judge said.
The petitioner’s counsel, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, requested a two-week stay on the order. However, the court declined, with Justice Nagaprasanna stating that he could not stay his order. The Chief Minister is expected to file an appeal in the Supreme Court challenging the High Court’s ruling.
Alleges conspiracy
In response to the decision, Siddaramaiah said during a press conference, “Our ministers and PCC members will decide the next steps. I do not fear the conspiracy created by the BJP and JD(S), and the misuse of the Governor. The people of Karnataka are with me and the party.”
Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar echoed the conspiracy sentiment and called the MUDA scam a political conspiracy by the BJP and assured that the Congress will stand by Siddaramaiah. On the other hand, the BJP welcomed the judgment and urged the CM to step down for an unbiased investigation. Union Minister Pralhad Joshi called for a CBI inquiry into the MUDA case, stating, “The Karnataka CM should resign, and a CBI investigation must be conducted.”
The tug of war between the Governor and the Chief Minister began on August 16, after the Governor approved the decision to prosecute Siddaramaiah in connection with the MUDA land scam case. In response, the CM had filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the Governor’s order, arguing that it was issued hastily and without proper consideration of the facts, the law and constitutional mandates.