E-Paper
Muda case: Court asks Lokayukta to submit report by March 7
The court adjourned the hearing after petitioner Snehmayi Krishna requested a copy of the Lokayukta’s investigation report
A special court for elected representatives on Monday adjourned the hearing in the Mysore Urban Development Authority (Muda) land case to March 7, directing Lokayukta officials to submit their report by then.
The court adjourned the hearing after petitioner Snehmayi Krishna requested a copy of the Lokayukta’s investigation report, which cleared chief minister Siddaramaiah, his wife Parvathi, B Mallikarjun, and landowner Devaraju of any wrongdoing. The court stated that objections to the report, if any, must be filed after reviewing the document.
“The court responded by instructing that objections could be filed after receiving the report. Krishna acknowledged this directive and stated that he would submit any grievances once he had access to the document. As a result, the hearing has been adjourned to March 7, with Lokayukta officials directed to submit the report by then,” said an officer in the know of the development.
Even as the Lokayukta’s findings dismissed the allegations, Krishna maintained that the case warrants further scrutiny. “I will present further evidence in the coming days,” he said.
Meanwhile, Enforcement Directorate (ED) has intensified its parallel probe into the financial irregularities linked to the Muda land allotment. The ED has summoned several Muda officials, including commissioner Raghunandan, urban planning member Shivaramayya, secretary Prasanna Kumar, chief accounts officer Manjula, former commissioner’s PA Prashanth, and section data operator Chandru, instructing them to submit documents related to Survey No. 464, a 3.16-acre plot at the centre of the controversy.
The case revolves around a land parcel in Mysuru’s Devanur 3rd Stage, which Siddaramaiah claimed was gifted to his wife in 1998. In 2014, Muda acquired the land for development without prior approval, leading Parvathi to seek compensation. Subsequently, she was allotted 14 residential plots, totaling 38,284 square feet, in prime locations— raising questions over the fairness of the allotment, with the petitioner arguing that the exchange disproportionately benefited the family.
The FIR, registered under case number 11/2024, listed Siddaramaiah as the first accused (A1), followed by Parvathi (A2), Mallikarjuna Swamy (A3), and Devaraju (A4). The Lokayukta’s final report concluded that the allegations lacked substantial evidence and should be categorised as a civil matter rather than a criminal case. A notice issued to Krishna informed him of the option to challenge the report before the designated magistrate within a week of receiving the document.
“The case has been categorised as civil in nature, and no criminal investigation is warranted,” the letter stated. It further noted that “the allegations stemmed from either misinterpretation of the law or lacked substantial proof to proceed with legal action.” The petitioner was informed, “If you wish to contest the findings, you may file an objection before the designated magistrate within one week of receiving this notice.”
Even as the Lokayukta probe comes to a close, the ED continues its investigation into alleged financial irregularities in the land allotment. The agency has already submitted its findings to the Karnataka high court in a sealed cover. Additionally, a petition has been filed seeking summons for Parvathi and minister Bhairathi Suresh, with legal arguments currently ongoing in the high court.
The Karnataka HC previously permitted a Lokayukta inquiry into the land allotment in September 2024. On February 7, it declined a request to transfer the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), ruling that the case would remain under the Lokayukta’s jurisdiction.
