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.
Bengaluru: Four arrested for housebreaking, threats, extortion; fake PSI among accused
Bengaluru: Vidyaranyapura police have arrested four persons, including a man posing as a Police Sub-Inspector (PSI), for allegedly breaking into a house, threatening the occupants, and extorting money while wearing police uniforms.
The arrested accused have been identified as Mallikarjuna, Pramod, Vinay, and Hrithik.
Police said the accused had hatched a plan to pose as police personnel, conduct fake raids, and extort money from residents by intimidation.
ALSO READ: Bantwal police arrest two men for illegal sale of narcotics, seize two vehicles, 810 gm ganja
According to the police, Mallikarjuna had failed the PSI examination twice and later falsely projected himself as a PSI. He allegedly conducted photo shoots in his hometown, Siraguppa, wearing a police uniform, baton, cap, and shoes, claiming to be serving as a PSI in Bengaluru.
On December 7, the four accused allegedly went to the house of Naveen in the Vidyaranyapura limits, threatened him with a stick and an iron rod, and claimed they had information that he was selling ganja. Under the pretext of searching, they allegedly extorted ₹87,000 through bank transfer, ₹53,000 in cash kept in the house, and ₹2,000 from his wallet.
Following Naveen’s complaint, Vidyaranyapura police registered a case and launched an operation, leading to the arrest of all four accused. Police have seized ₹45,000 in cash and the car used to commit the crime.
Further investigation is underway.
