E-Paper
SC refuses to vacate interim stay on CBI probe against Karnataka Dy CM in DA case
The SC refused to vacate the Karnataka HC’s interim order staying the CBI probe into a disproportionate assets (DA) case against Karnataka DCM DK Shivakumar.
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to vacate the Karnataka high court’s interim order staying the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into a disproportionate assets case against Karnataka deputy chief minister DK Shivakumar but sought his response on the CBI appeal against the court order.
A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi issued notice and posted the matter for further hearing on November 7
CBI filed an appeal against the Karnataka high court order dated June 12.
Additional solicitor general SV Raju, appearing for CBI, urged the bench to vacate the stay.
The bench said, “We will not grant ex parte stay (grant of stay without hearing the other side),” while observing, “He (Shivakumar) is not running anywhere...”
CBI registered a corruption case against Shivakumar in October 2020. This followed the 2017 raid by the Income Tax Department and probe thereafter by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The state government had accorded its sanction in 2019.
The consent order issued by the Karnataka government challenged by Shivakumar led to registration of a regular case in 2020 under relevant provisions of the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act. According to CBI, as per an election affidavit submitted by Shivakumar in 2013, he was found to be in possession of movable and immovable assets worth ₹33.92 crore as on April 1, 2013.
The CBI stated in its appeal to the top court that between April 2013 to April 2018, Shivakumar and his family members acquired assets and the total value of all his acquisitions marked a rise from ₹128 crore to ₹162 crore, showing a jump of nearly 45% or nearly ₹75 crore.
Finding fault with the HC order, CBI said that the interim stay was issued without hearing the investigation agency. The HC gave no reasoning to stall the probe where 90% of work was complete.
Even on the legal front, CBI said that the stay could not be granted as this was a case involving disproportionate assets. Shivakumar had relied on Section 17A of the PC Act which protects public servants against any enquiry or investigation of offences relatable to the decisions taken by a public servant in discharge of official functions and duties. CBI alleged that the DA case was not relatable to any official duty performed by Shivakumar, then a member of Karnataka legislative assembly, who would not be entitled to Section 17A protection.
The HC order was further questioned on the ground that the state government order challenged by Shivakumar was previously challenged by another person associated with Shivakumar’s family before the Karnataka HC which dismissed the same in July 2020. It was CBI’s case that this judgment was binding on the HC which ought not to have stayed the notification allowing CBI probe.
