Bengaluru, Dec 18 : The Special Court for People’s Representatives on Thursday expressed displeasure with the Lokayukta for failing to file the final investigation report in the MUDA land site allotment case, involving Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.
Despite clear directions from the court to submit the final “B report” by December 18 in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case, the Lokayukta placed only an interim progress report.
Questioning the delay, the judge sought an explanation from Lokayukta officials, who stated that the final report could not be filed as prosecution sanction against certain officials was still awaited.
During the proceedings, the court asked the Special Public Prosecutor to produce the case diary. The prosecutor submitted that the report could be placed before the court in a sealed cover if additional time was granted.
This was strongly opposed by the complainant, activist Snehamayi Krishna, who alleged that there was an attempt to mislead the court.
Krishna further contended that no meaningful investigation had been conducted and accused the authorities of shielding the accused. He also claimed that no witnesses had been examined, despite specific directions issued by the court.
Observing that it could not pass any order in the absence of a final investigation report, the court adjourned the matter.
The special court deferred its orders on the petitions challenging the Lokayukta’s B report and the clean chit granted to CM Siddaramaiah and three others to December 23.
The Lokayukta Police in February had given a clean chit to Siddaramaiah, his wife B M Parvathi, and two other accused in connection with the case, stating that allegations against them have not been proven due to lack of evidence.
Siddaramaiah, his wife, brother-in-law B M Mallikarjun Swamy, Devaraju — from whom Swamy had purchased a land and gifted it to Parvathi — and others have been named in the FIR registered by the Lokayukta police on September 27, 2024.
In the site allotment case, it is alleged that 14 compensatory sites were allotted to Siddaramaiah’s wife in an upmarket area in Mysuru (Vijayanagar Layout 3rd and 4th stages), which had higher property value as compared to the location of her land which had been “acquired” by MUDA.
The MUDA had allotted plots to Parvathi under a 50:50 ratio scheme in lieu of 3.16 acres of her land, where it developed a residential layout.
Under the controversial scheme, MUDA allotted 50 per cent of developed land to the land losers in lieu of undeveloped land acquired from them for forming residential layouts.
It was also alleged that Parvathi had no legal title over the 3.16 acres of land at survey number 464 of Kasare village, Kasaba hobli of Mysuru taluk.
