National

Siddaramaiah got ‘fake clean chit’ in MUDA case, claims BJP

Bengaluru, Feb 20 (IANS) Reacting strongly to the clean chit given by Karnataka Lokayukta to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah in connection with the MUDA land scam case, Karnataka unit BJP president B.Y. Vijayendra alleged that the senior Congress leader has obtained a “fake clean chit”.

Speaking to IANS at the BJP headquarters on Thursday, Vijayendra said: “The clean chit given to CM Siddaramaiah’s family is fake. The officers chosen by CM Siddaramaiah conducted the investigation, so nothing much could be expected from it. The party will discuss how to take this forward.

“In the MUDA scam, the Lokayukta granting a clean chit to CM Siddaramaiah was expected. As we have repeatedly pointed out, during the course of the investigation, the Chief Minister’s family members visited the Lokayukta office late at night as if the office was their close relative’s residence. This clearly shows the nature of the investigation conducted by the Lokayukta. Given this background, it is no surprise that CM Siddaramaiah has been given a clean chit in the Rs 5,000 crore MUDA scam. It’s a fake clean chit.”

Vijayendra said that CM Siddaramaiah had earlier claimed that there was no scam and insisted that he had not obtained sites illegally.

“We launched a padyatra from Bengaluru to Mysuru, his hometown. Fearing the political impact, he hastily wrote a letter to MUDA, stating that he would return the 14 allotted sites,” he said.

“My question to CM Siddaramaiah today is – if neither he nor his family obtained sites illegally, why did he return them? If the Lokayukta has given him a clean chit, does that mean returning stolen goods absolves a thief? CM Siddaramaiah and the media need to clarify this.

“We are not at all surprised by this clean chit. I want to ask CM Siddaramaiah—if he initially claimed that the 14 sites allotted to his family were legal, why did he surrender them to MUDA? He must answer this,” he added.

The BJP leader wondered that if the Karnataka CM himself admitted that the sites were illegally allotted, why did the Lokayukta give him a clean chit?

“When the Chief Minister handpicks officers to investigate allegations against him, what other outcome can be expected? We will discuss the future course of action,” he said.

Meanwhile, Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council, Chalavadi Narayanaswamy, told IANS: “Chief Minister Siddaramaiah is the boss of Lokayukta officers. How can these officers investigate and punish their own superior? Given this situation, the case should be handed over to the CBI.

“A team of IAS officers was formed to look into the matter, and it was never withdrawn. Similarly, an SIT was constituted, and it was also not withdrawn. The court ordered the Lokayukta probe, but the police officers working in the Lokayukta are ultimately under the Chief Minister.”

Narayanaswamy further questioned: “Why were the 14 sites allotted to the Chief Minister’s family returned? What does surrendering those sites mean? He realised they were obtained illegally. The land did not originally belong to them — it was acquired by MUDA for a layout, yet they purchased it and then sought alternative sites.”

“There was pressure on the Lokayukta to grant a clean chit. If CM Siddaramaiah has the courage, let him face a CBI investigation or resign from his post. We have decided to fight this, and a statewide movement will be launched across Karnataka,” he said.

The Karnataka Lokayukta, which is probing the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case, submitted a 11,000-page closure report to the Special Court for MLAs and MPs in Bengaluru on Thursday.

Mysuru Lokayukta SP, T.J. Udesh, submitted the report to the court a day after the Karnataka Lokayukta, which investigated the matter, issued a clean chit to CM Siddaramaiah and the other accused in the case.

Sources reveal that the Lokayukta has filed a closure report in the case against Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, his wife B.M. Parvathi (Accused No. 2), Mallikarjunswamy, Siddaramaiah’s brother-in-law (Accused No. 3), and landowner J. Devaraju (Accused No. 4).

–IANS

mka/pgh

Related Articles

Back to top button

You cannot copy content of this page