Supreme Court notice to Karnataka on Yeddyurappa plea to close bribery case

Former chief minister BS Yeddyurappa asked the Supreme Court to make the Karnataka government a party in his petition that requested the top court to close the ₹12 crore bribery case against him

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Bharatiya Janata Party-led Karnataka government to respond to a plea by former chief minister BS Yeddyurappa who is seeking to close a bribery case revived against him by the Karnataka high court.

Former Karnataka chief minister BS Yeddyurappa with other leaders of the BJP at Karnataka Backward Classes Conference, in Kalaburagi on Sunday (ANI)

On September 23, the top court stayed the investigation into the bribery case and issued notice to the private complainant Abraham TJ who accused Yeddyurappa of receiving a bribe of ₹12.5 crore from a construction firm in connection with a Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) housing project.

On Monday, a request was made by senior advocate Siddhartha Dave appearing for the former CM to make the state government a party. He said the state was a party before the high court too.

Allowing the oral request by Dave, the bench of justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Hima Kohli said: “We should have the benefit of the state’s response”. The court also issued notice to the Karnataka government and posted the matter for hearing after three weeks.

Yeddyurappa, who is a senior BJP leader, has challenged the Karnataka high court’s September 7 order restoring a private complaint against him by Abraham TJ, an activist. The court only stayed the investigation against the former chief minister but allowed the probe against the other accused, including Yeddyurappa’s son BY Vijayendra to continue.

Yeddyurappa argued that the complaint could not proceed in the absence of any sanction. He pointed out in his petition that a bar operates on the special court from referring the matter for investigation under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act without prior sanction.

The high court order dealt with this argument and interpreted it by saying that this provision applied to the police and not to a court which orders registration of case. “The bar under Section 17A of the PC Act would kick in only post-registration of FIR when the police are required to commence the investigation,” the high court held.

Earlier, the special CBI court on July 8 last year dismissed the complaint filed by the activist against which he filed an appeal with the high court.