SC leaves it to Karnataka HC to decide on CBI plea against stay on probe into DK Shivakumar DA case

The CBI had urged the bench to direct the high court to decide on its application for the vacation of stay in two weeks.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, appearing for the CBI, told the bench that the stay on investigation was based on the strength of falsehood.

He said that what was ordered was “no coercive action”, which did not mean a stay of investigation. The CBI has alleged that there was no stay on the investigation, but it was stated before the division bench that the deputy chief minister enjoyed the stay all through.

Karnataka sought adjournment

At the outset of the hearing, senior advocate Vipin Sanghi, appearing for the Karnataka government, sought adjournment for two days so that the state government could file its reply to the CBI plea.

Sanghi urged the bench to list the matter on Monday, 20 November, after the weeklong Deepavali vacation of the top court.

On the last hearing date, on 7 November, the Karnataka government sought the listing after the Deepavali break to file its reply to the CBI’s plea.

However, the court insisted that it would hear the matter on Friday.

Also read: Karnataka to use technology to prevent human-animal conflict

The Supreme Court hearing

The Supreme Court had, on 16 October, issued notice to Shivakumar on CBI’s plea challenging the high court interim order staying the probe.

Justice Aniruddha Bose, heading the bench comprising Justice Bela M Trivedi, said, “We are not staying it ex-parte” as ASG Raju had urged the bench to stay the high court order.

ASG Raju had told the bench that 90 percent of the probe in the case was already over and urged the bench to put on hold the high court order staying the investigation.

The Karnataka High Court had stayed the sanction granted by the state government for investigation in an alleged graft and disproportionate assets case involving Shivakumar.

I-T conducted raid on DKS in 2017

The controversy surrounding Shivakumar commenced in August 2017 when the Income Tax (I-T) Department raided his premises.

At that time, Shivakumar was safeguarding 44 Congress MLAs from Gujarat at a resort near Bengaluru, anticipating potential poaching attempts by the BJP before a Rajya Sabha election.

The I-T officials, accompanied by armed central police forces, entered the resort on 2 August, 2017 and also executed searches at 67 locations linked to Shivakumar, his family, and friends nationwide.

The I-T Department reported discovering unaccounted-for cash of around ₹9 crore and attached properties worth crores for further investigation.

Also read: ₹500 crore irregularities during BJP rule in Karnataka: Priyank Kharge

The ED, CBI probes

Based on the I-T chargesheet, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) initiated a money laundering probe against Shivakumar in 2018.

Approximately ten days after facing questioning by the ED officials, Shivakumar became the subject of CBI scrutiny.

Relying on the ED’s investigation findings, the CBI sought permission from the state government to file an FIR against the Congress state president.

The sanction was granted on 25 September, 2019, and on 3 October, 2020, Shivakumar was formally booked by the CBI under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

In September 2019, he was incarcerated in Tihar Jail but secured conditional bail from the Delhi High Court a few weeks later.

Shivakumar has consistently criticised the CBI’s actions, branding them as “mental harassment” and questioning their timing, particularly in the lead-up to the Karnataka Assembly polls.

He contends that the CBI, by issuing repeated notices, is applying undue pressure despite the case originating in 2020.

High court stayed CBI proceedings

On 10 February 2023, the Karnataka High Court intervened, staying CBI proceedings in the corruption case against Shivakumar.

The court instructed the probe agency to furnish an action taken report (ATR) in the case registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act. This stay was subsequently extended on different dates.

The high court raised concerns about the CBI’s progress over the past two years, questioning when the final report would be filed.

As it adjourned the case, the court emphasised that the cases against Shivakumar dated back to 2020.