After weeks of trying to corner the Congress and Chief Minister Siddaramaiah in particular on multiple alleged scams, the opposition is likely to find the tables turned as the Lokayukta tightens a nine-year-old graft case. The accused in the case are two former CMs, Janata Dal (Secular) [(JD(S)] president and now Union Minister HD Kumaraswamy and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader BS Yediyurappa. The investigation in the case, which pertains to alleged illegal denotification of land in Bengaluru, saw little progress, either with the Lokayukta or the Anti-Corruption Bureau, even though the complaint was filed in 2015, halfway into Siddaramaiah’s tenure as CM. Even as the Lokayukta police are set to record the statement of a crucial witness this week, the Congress deputed three of its ministers to release documents about the denotification and demand expediting the investigation.

The land in question is a 1.11-acre plot in Gangenahalli, Kasaba hobli, Bengaluru North taluk. Yediyurappa is accused of finalising the denotification of the land in 2010, for which the process had been initiated by Kumaraswamy during his first stint as Chief Minister. The plot, whose value dramatically escalated after the denotification, was eventually bought by Kumaraswamy’s brother-in-law. 

Barely two years before the allegedly illegal denotification, Yediyurappa and Kumaraswamy were bitter enemies due to the JD(S) leader’s refusal to give up the CM’s post as had been agreed when the BJP and JD(S) formed the coalition government in 2006.

Siddaramaiah has been under pressure from the opposition BJP and JD(S) – who are back in an alliance – over multiple scams since June. The misappropriation of funds in the Karnataka Maharshi Valmiki Scheduled Tribes Development Corporation, which came to light in May, forced the resignation of Tribal Affairs Minister B Nagendra. This was followed by allegations against the Chief Minister of using political influence to obtain government sites for his wife in a prime location developed by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA). The Congress responded with full-page ads in newspapers with a list of over a dozen scams that had allegedly occurred during the BJP government’s tenure. Next came the illegal land allotment allegations against Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Minister Priyank Kharge.

Read: Siddaramaiah claims innocence in MUDA land scam: Why it’s not so simple

Now, the Lokayukta police have perked up to prosecute Yeddyurappa and Kumaraswamy even as they and their parties spearhead the attack against Congress leaders. Rakesh Singh, a retired IAS officer who was the secretary to Kumaraswamy during his tenure as CM, is expected to be produced before a magistrate this week to record his statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Rakesh is currently chairperson of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority of Karnataka (RERA-K). 

According to sources, Rakesh has told the Lokayukta police that he acted entirely on Kumaraswamy’s instructions and that he was not aware of the details regarding the plot of land in question. He is likely to repeat these statements before the magistrate later this week, sources said.

But the Lokayukta’s star witness is Rajashekaraiah—the man who supposedly wrote to Kumaraswamy in 2007 when he was the chief minister, requesting denotification. He has told investigators that he did not write to the CM seeking denotification, sources said. 

Rajashekaraiah’s denial of any knowledge of the letter puts both Kumaraswamy and Yediyurappa in a tight spot, as they would have to now explain to investigators how the letter – on the basis of which the denotification was carried out – ended up in the CM’s office in the first place. 

Denotification Part 1

RTI activist Jayakumar Hiremath blew the lid on the alleged scam in 2015 when he filed a complaint with the Lokayukta. According to Jayakumar’s complaint, Kumaraswamy initiated the land denotification process in August 2007, and Yediyurappa denotified it two years later, allegedly illegally.

According to documents with TNM, the 1.11-acre plot was acquired by the Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA) for the Matadahalli Extension in north Bengaluru. The owners were G Thimmareddy, T Nagappa, and Munuswamappa, and are now deceased. 

Land acquisition was initiated in March 1976 and completed in December 1977. By April 1988, the BDA took possession of the plot under Section 16(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, according to Jayakumar Hiremath’s complaint.

Nineteen years later, on August 22, 2007, the chief minister’s office received a letter from a man named Rajashekaraiah, who requested denotification of the Gangenahalli land, claiming that he was the owner. 

Kumaraswamy was the Chief Minister at the time, heading the BJP-JD(S) coalition government.

Rakesh Singh, who is set to record his statement this week, was then Secretary to  Kumaraswamy. He wrote to the Principal Secretary of the Urban Development Department (UDD), saying that the CM had received a request from Rajashekaraiah to denotify the land and that he had been directed to seek opinions from the department. 

Principal Secretary of UDD, K Jothiramalingam, replied, saying that it was “not a fit case” for denotification because notice had been issued under Section 16(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, documents show. Under this provision, if the government has already acquired land after paying compensation, it can transfer the land to the authority concerned for the purpose for which it was acquired.

On September 10, 2007 – a month before Kumaraswamy was forced to quit – his mother-in-law Vimala drew a General Power of Attorney agreement with 21 legal heirs of the three original owners of the 1.11-acre plot.

On October 8, 2007, Kumaraswamy was forced to resign after the BJP withdrew support after the JD(S) leader refused to give up the CM’s post. The state then saw president’s rule for about a month before Yediyurappa’s first stint as CM, which lasted eight days. This was followed by another period of the President’s rule before Yediyurappa became CM again on a sympathy vote after elections in May 2008. 

Denotification Part 2

Nearly two years into his tenure as CM, Yediyurappa re-opened the file on the plot of land that Kumaraswamy wanted to denotify. 

The Joint Secretary to Yediyurappa wrote to various departments “on the CM’s instructions” on March 27, 2010, asking for “complete information and clear opinions” regarding the plot. The opinion from bureaucrats in several departments was the same—that the land could not be denotified. However, Yediyurappa disregarded these opinions and signed off on the denotification, and an order was published in the gazette on June 7, 2010. 

A month later, on July 7, 2010, Kumaraswamy’s mother-in-law Vimala sold the land to her son and Kumaraswamy’s brother-in-law TS Channappa, who is an orthopaedic surgeon in Bengaluru. 

Lokayukta investigation

Jayakumar’s complaint to the Lokayukta was filed five years after Yediyurappa denotified the land allegedly in violation of the law. The Lokayukta police registered an FIR on May 5, 2015, against Yediyurappa, Kumaraswamy, Vimala, and Channappa, under sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act (POCA) 1988 relating to a public servant acquiring property under his control and obtaining pecuniary advantage or valuable thing by illegal means. The Lokayukta also invoked provisions pertaining to criminal breach of trust when entrusted with property, stolen property, and cheating. At the time, a Congress government headed by Siddaramaiah was in power. 

In June 2017, two years after the Lokayukta booked him, Yediyurappa filed a writ petition in the Karnataka High Court, seeking quashing of the case against him. 

During the hearing of the case, advocate CV Nagesh, who represented Yediyurappa, sought the court’s permission to add fresh grounds in seeking quashing of the case. Nagesh argued that Section 17 of POCA had been amended in July 2018 and sought the court’s permission to amend Yediyurappa’s petition. 

Interestingly, Jayakumar Hiremath sought the Court’s permission to withdraw the complaint, citing Yediyurappa’s plea to amend the petition for quashing of the case.

In his order, in January 2021, Justice John Michael Cunha was scathing in his observations on Jayakumar’s plea to withdraw the Lokayukta complaint. The judge observed, “One can readily draw an inference that he (Jayakumar Hiremath) has either fallen prey to the allurements or has yielded to the pressure of the petitioner or other accused persons named in the FIR, as it is evident that at the instance of the petitioner (Yediyurappa), (the) petition was amended solely with a view to create a ruse for (Jayakumar Hiremath) to seek withdrawal of the complaint.”

Justice Cunha then went to say that he would refrain from commenting on Jayakumar’s “dubious conduct” and directed the investigating agency and the trial court “to take note of the unscrupulous, immoral, and unholy nexus between the petitioner (Yediyurappa) and (Jayakumar Hiremath) and other offenders and take suitable action as per law at appropriate stage.”

The judge noted that the amendments to the POCA were prospective in nature and not retrospective and dismissed Yediyurappa’s plea to quash the case. 

Apart from Yediyurappa, RTI activist Jayakumar Hiremath had also filed multiple complaints against several prominent politicians, including R Ashok, and even institutions such as the Karnataka Industrial Development Areas Board.