Karnataka HC stays lower court order against CM
Karnataka High Court granted interim stay on a lower court order which had taken cognisance of offences against Yeddurappa`s family in four private complaints.
Bangalore: In a further relief to scam-hit Chief
Minister BS Yeddyurappa and his family, Karnataka High Court
on Friday granted interim stay on a lower court order which had
taken cognisance of offences against them in four private
With this the High Court has stayed the 23rd Additional
Civil and Sessions Judge C B Hippargi order taking cognisance
of five complaints filed by two city based advocates alleging
corruption and nepotism against Yeddyurappa and others.
Justice KN Keshavanarayana granted the stay on four
petitions (filed in connection with four complaints) by Sohan
Kumar, son-in-law of Chief Minister, challenging the lower
The court also ordered issue of notices to the two
respondents, advocates Sirajin Basha and KN Balaraj.
On March 29, the High Court had stayed proceedings in
the first complaint, over which the lower court had ordered
Lokayukta probe on March 24.
Following the High Court stay on the remaining four
complaints, further proceedings on five complaints in the
Sessions Court comes to a halt till further orders.
The advocates had filed five complaints before the Special
Lokayukta Court for prosecuting Yeddyurappa and others in
January after the Governor H R Bhardwaj accorded sanction for
The lower court has completed recording of evidence from
complainants on their second complaint and is yet to take up
the exercise on the remaining three.
The complaints against Yeddyurappa and others relate to
alleged irregularities in denotification of land.
Meanwhile, Karnataka Home Minister R Ashoka, against whom
a private complaint has been taken cognisance of, has got
relief following the High Court granting interim stay on
lower court order till April five.
Justice Keshavanarayana granted the stay on a plea filed
by Ashoka, who has been accused of securing denotification of
land by Bangalore Development Authority, bending rules.
Ashoka had contested the lower court action of taking
cognisance of offence, stating that the Governor had refused
sanction to prosecute him.