Daijiworld Media Network 

Bengaluru, March 7: The Karnataka High Court on Friday quashed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) summons issued to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s wife, B. M. Parvathi, and Urban Development Minister Byrathi Suresh, in connection with the controversial Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna, heading the bench, delivered the decision in favour of the accused individuals, offering significant relief to CM Siddaramaiah, who is named as accused number one in the investigation.

Earlier, the High Court had extended immunity to Parvathi and Minister Suresh by exempting them from appearing before the ED. Parvathi, the second accused in the case, had approached the court to quash the summons issued to her, while Suresh, a close associate of Siddaramaiah, filed a similar petition.

The ED had claimed that during the investigation, 14 allotted sites were found in the possession of CM Siddaramaiah’s wife, arguing that these sites constituted proceeds of crime. The agency had also linked the case to Suresh, alleging that his office had given endorsements in the illegal allotment process, leading to the issuance of summons for questioning.

The Additional Solicitor General (ASG), appearing for the ED, asserted that the 14 sites were allotted through illegal means by influential individuals, including the relatives of former MUDA officials. The ASG argued that corruption and illicit wealth were intrinsically linked and referenced a private complaint alleging a Rs 5,000 crore scam, which led to the FIR filed by the Lokayukta.

However, Senior Counsel Sandeep Chowta, representing Parvathi, argued that the ED was overstepping its jurisdiction. Chowta contended that the ED was investigating 1,708 sites, not just the 14 in question, and claimed the ED had seized 160 sites unrelated to the case. He also pointed out that the Lokayukta Police had already investigated the matter, filed a closure report, and found no evidence of misappropriation.

Further defending his client, Chowta stated that Parvathi had returned the 14 disputed sites on October 1, 2024, and had no further possession of them. He challenged the validity of the ECIR filed by the ED, noting it was registered only four days after the FIR was lodged.