No CBI Probe Merely Because An Accused Is Sitting CM, Can't Doubt Lokayukta's Independence Without Reason: Karnataka HC In MUDA Case

Seeking reference of investigation to the CBI because one of the accused is a sitting Chief Minister "is un-acceptance” said the Karnataka High Court while dismissing Snehamayi Krishna's plea for transferring the investigation into the alleged Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) "scam" from Lokayukta police to the CBI.Justice M Nagaprasanna in his order noted the petitioner's "emphatic submission" that only because ninth respondent is a sitting Chief Minister, the investigation should be transferred, as fair, fearless and transparent investigation cannot be done by the Lokayukta. On this the court said:"The echo that the reference of investigation should be made to the CBI, as one of the accused is a sitting Chief Minister, is un-acceptance, as none of the maladies illustrated by the Apex Court are present in the case at hand.”Party making allegations against police in routine manner not enough to transfer probe to CBIThe court referred to several Apex court judgments wherein investigation was transferred and refused to be transferred to the hands of the CBI and said that the probe was transferred from the hands of the local Police in those facts and circumstances. It further said that no independent agency was investigating into those offences, which the Supreme Court thought it fit to transfer. It further underscored that merely because a party has levelled "some allegations" against the local Police in a "routine manner", the matter should not be transferred to the CBI.Then it said, “The extraordinary power must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations, in instances that may have wide ramifications.” With respect to such cases it said, “They were all cases where the matters were taken away from the hands of the local Police and referred to the CBI. In few of the cases, the Apex Court was considering the local Police themselves involved in the allegation or cases where huge ramifications would ensue.” It further emphasized that “Not one case is placed on record where the investigation from an independent body like that of Lokpal or Lokayukta is taken away midstream and transferred to the hands of the CBI.” It then said, “The maladies projected are on a blend of all judgments rendered by the Apex Court. The blend does not indicate that the panacea to a malady, that is not even existing, cannot be by referring the matter to the CBI for investigation.” Can't hold Lokayukta as government's extended armNext it referred to Apex court judgment in the case of C. RANGASWAMAIAH v. KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, (1998) and the judgment of the Division bench of the High Court in the case of CHIDANANDA URS B.G. v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, 2022, wherein the court had considered independence of the Lokayukta while abolishing the office of Anti-Corruption Bureau by its order. Referring to Lokayukta probes against earlier chief ministers and the judgments the court said “The sitting Chief Minister Sri B.S. Yediyurappa was not once but twice investigated. He had to resign, as the Lokayukta had found him guilty. H.D. Kumaraswamy who had ceased to be the Chief Minister was also investigated.” Following which it observed “Thus, the Apex Court and the Division Bench of this Court have clearly recognized the independence of the Lokayukta.” Then it said, “This Court, by a stroke of pen, for the asking of the petitioner, cannot now without any rhyme or reason, remotely think of holding Lokayukta not to be an independent agency, or an extended arm of the Government. None of these attributes are attributable to the Lokayukta.” It added “When the reference of this nature is sought, it is not personal integrity that is to be looked into, but institutional integrity. Lokayukta as an institution, has displayed insulation from all external influences in the investigations conducted in the past. Therefore, in the considered view of this Court, institutional integrity, independence of the Lokayukta will not be forgotten, as it is competent to investigate the offence against a sitting Chief Minister, as it is done in the past. If the past was good, the present cannot be found to be in flaw.”Lokayukta an independent agency, competent to probe allegations CMFollowing which it held “I hold the Lokayukta to be an independent agency, competent to investigate into the allegations against high functionaries, including the Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka.” Dismissing the petition the court said “Since the concerned Court has directed submission of final report which has been deferred by intermittent orders passed by this Court, the respondent/Lokayukta would be at liberty now to place the report before the concerned Court as directed by this Court and it is for the petitioner to avail all such remedies as are available in law.”Case Title: Snehamayi Krishna AND Union of India & Others Case No: WP 27484/2024 Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 48Click Here To Read/Download Order

No CBI Probe Merely Because An Accused Is Sitting CM, Can't Doubt Lokayukta's Independence Without Reason: Karnataka HC In MUDA Case

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

No CBI Probe Merely Because An Accused Is Sitting CM, Can't Doubt Lokayukta's Independence Without Reason: Karnataka HC In MUDA Case

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers