MUDA case: Court reserves verdict in ED's petition challenging Lokayukta 'B' report
Bengaluru: The Special Court for People's Representatives, which heard the petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) challenging the Lokayukta 'B' Report that stated Chief Minister Siddaramaiah had no role in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) illegal land allotment case, has reserved its verdict.
During the hearing, the Lokayukta's lawyer said that the petition filed by the ED is not allowed under the law. There is no clarity about the investigation in the ED's petition. The ED had given a letter and 27 documents to the Lokayukta police. Based on these documents, the Lokayukta Investigating Officer filed the 'B' Report.
The ED's letter was also leaked to the media. This letter and the documents are included on page 646 of the charge sheet. The Lokayukta Investigating Officer's opinion has also been recorded. The ED is not an aggrieved party and does not have the right to question the 'B' Report. The ED is not allowed to file such an interim application, lawyer Venkatesh Arabatdi argued, citing a Supreme Court verdict.
“The Lokayukta Investigating Officer examined all the documents collected by the police and others and gave their opinion. If the ED, a third party, is allowed to intervene, it will create complications,” lawyer Venkatesh Arabatdi urged, requesting that the ED's application not be considered.
Later, ED lawyer Madhukar Deshpande argued that the ED is a statutory informant under Section 66(2) of the PMLA Act. The ED’s powers were clarified in the Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary case. Judgments in the Martin and Nagaraj cases in 2022 also upheld the ED's powers. The Supreme Court ruled that ED and local police investigations should be complementary. In such cases, the aggrieved person does not need to be directly affected. The ED can also file a complaint against the 'B' Report, he argued.
following which, the lawyer for the complainant, Snehamayi Krishna, argued that if any person provides information, they should be considered a witness.
But while the Lokayukta police gave one version, the ED gave another. The Lokayukta said the police had not considered the ED's report.
The court, after hearing all arguments, reserved its order for April 15.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Pahalgam terror attack: No fireworks, cheerleaders in MI vs SRH IPL match
players to sport black armbands
Hyderabad(PTI): The players of Sunrisers Hyderabad and Mumbai Indians will wear black armbands during their IPL match which will not feature cheerleaders and fireworks here on Wednesday to mourn the victims of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam that caused 26 deaths.
The teams will also observe a minute's silence to pay their respects to those affected by the incident that has drawn international condemnation.
"The players of two teams will wear black armbands and observe a minute's silence in memory of all those who lost their lives in the terrorist attack in Kashmir's Pahalgam," a BCCI source told PTI.
"As a mark of respect there would be no cheerleaders on the sidelines of MI vs SRH game. No crackers will be burst," he added.
Terrorists opened fire on civilians at the popular tourist location in south Kashmir on Tuesday, killing at least 26 persons and injuring several others.
The Resistance Front (TRF), which is a part of the banned Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terror group, claimed responsibility for the attack. The attack has drawn strong condemnation from across the world.
The Indian cricket team snapped bilateral cricket with Pakistan after the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks and recently refused to tour the country for the Champions Trophy, prompting the ICC to make provisions for a neutral venue in Dubai.
_vb_87.jpeg)
