K’taka HC Resumes Hearing On CM Siddaramaiah’s Prosecution Case; Solicitor General Defends Governor’s Decision

The Karnataka High Court resumed the hearing on Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s writ petition against Governor Thaawar Chand Gehlot’s decision to allow his prosecution over alleged irregularities in the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA). The Bench, led by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, is currently handling the case.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the Governor’s decision. He emphasized that the decision was made lawfully and followed due process. He argued that the Governor was not bound to consider the Cabinet’s advice in this case, as it involved a complaint against the CM.

Earlier, Senior Counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing CM Siddaramaiah, had argued that the Governor’s order should be quashed. Singhvi claimed that the Governor did not adhere to the principles of natural justice and ignored the Cabinet’s advice.

Also Read: PIL Filed In Supreme Court Urges Caste-Based Census For Welfare Of Marginalized Sections

However, Mehta countered by stating that the Governor acted independently. He pointed out that the Governor reviewed the Cabinet’s decision and the petitioner’s complaint before making his decision. He further claimed that Governor also saw CM Siddaramaiah’s clarification.

Mehta further argued that the Governor’s actions were consistent with a Supreme Court judgment. He also noted that the police, under Section 17(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, are not required to seek prior permission for an investigation, but anyone can approach the authorities for such permission.

Additionally, Mehta argued that no investigation is necessary to grant permission for prosecution in administrative matters. He maintained that the Governor was not obligated to respond to every clarification provided by the Cabinet and the CM. According to Mehta, the Governor’s order is clear, and disclosing more details could lead to the destruction of evidence.

The CM is seeking interim relief and the quashing of the Governor’s order, calling it unconstitutional.