The Supreme Court of India has expressed strong reservations regarding the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) involvement in politically sensitive cases, while simultaneously upholding a Karnataka High Court order that quashed proceedings against B.M. Parvathi, the wife of Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, in connection with the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA) case.
A bench comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran cautioned the ED against being used as a tool for political battles, emphasizing that political disputes should be resolved through elections rather than through investigative agencies. "Let political battles be fought before the electorate. Why are you being used?" the bench remarked. The court was hearing the ED's appeal challenging the Karnataka High Court order that had quashed the proceedings in the MUDA case against Parvathi.
The Supreme Court's criticism was sharp, with the Chief Justice stating, "Mr. Raju (Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the ED), please don't compel us to open our mouths. Otherwise, we will be forced to make some harsh comments about the ED. Unfortunately, I have some experience in Maharashtra. Don't perpetuate this violence across the country". The Additional Solicitor General agreed to withdraw the special leave petition, but clarified that this should not be treated as a precedent. Despite this, the court proceeded to dismiss the ED's appeal, affirming the High Court's decision.
The MUDA case involves allegations of illegal allotment of sites by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority. It was alleged that Siddaramaiah used his political influence to obtain compensation for 14 sites in his wife Parvathi's name, in exchange for 3.16 acres of land acquired by MUDA. Parvathi had surrendered the 14 sites, arguing that she was neither in possession of them nor enjoying any proceeds from them. She challenged the ED's proceedings, questioning the speed with which the agency initiated action under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), based on an FIR registered by the Lokayukta police following a trial court order.
The Karnataka High Court had earlier quashed the money laundering proceedings initiated against Parvathi and Urban Development Minister Byrathi Suresh on March 7, 2025. Justice M. Nagaprasanna of the High Court had quashed the ED summons to Parvathi, as well as to Byrathi Suresh, who was sought to be questioned in the case even though he was not named as an accused. The High Court's decision was based on the petitions filed by Parvathi and Suresh, challenging the ED's actions.
The Supreme Court's decision brings significant relief to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, especially at a time when he is reportedly facing a leadership tussle with his deputy, D.K. Shivakumar. The apex court's remarks underscore the importance of maintaining the autonomy and impartiality of investigative agencies, ensuring they are not used for political purposes.
