Lokayukta police to question former Muda chiefs in site allotment case
The anti-corruption agency is probing alleged site swap deals developed under a controversial 50:50 scheme.
Lokayukta SP TJ Udesha, who is the investigation officer confirmed to TOI that they had sought permission from the govt to question former commissioners of Muda, DB Natesh and GT Dinesh, concerning the disposal of developed sites to landowners under the contentious scheme when they were heading the urban development body and it has been approved by the govt previous week.
According to Lokayukta SP, about 1,055 sites in various layouts developed by the urban body, were given away for land acquired from landlords in Mysuru. One of the beneficiaries, Parvathi, returned the sites to the urban body after an FIR was filed against her, following a direction by the special court, Bengaluru.
Activist Snehamayi Krishna petitioned the special court to investigate the matter, accusing the chief minister and his family of grabbing the land and then obtaining developed sites from the urban body.
The anti-corruption agency that probed the matter submitted its report to the court giving a clean chit to the CM and his family, including his wife and brother-in-law, stating there is no evidence against them in the alleged scam. However, it discovered that not just 14 sites, but the urban body had given away about 1,055 sites to various individuals and GPA holders under the scheme.
As Lokayukta police have been directed by the special court to also probe other cases of giving sites under the scheme, the cops have sought permission to quiz the then commissioners under whose tenure the majority of sites were disposed of under the scheme.
Investigation officer Udesha said the commissioners are likely to be summoned as part of the investigation to record their statements. Earlier, they were questioned concerning Parvathi's case and now with regard to 1,000 other sites in which, more than 130 have benefited from the scheme.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- Indian Express
National Sports Governance Bill: Will govt clean up federations including BCCI — or isthere a danger of overreach?
nearly a decade ago, when the Supreme Court was hearing the recommendations made by a panel led by Justice R M Lodha, set up by the Court to suggest reforms to the Board of Control for Cricket in India, then Chief Justice T S Thakur asked the BCCI a rhetorical question: 'Are you refusing to be reformed?' In the coming days, the cricket board could, again, face a similar question. For years, the BCCI has acted on its own on governance issues. Through the National Sports Governance Bill, which Sports Minister Mansukh Mandaviya introduced in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday, the government has shown a will to bell the cat. So far, the BCCI has resisted all attempts to bring it under government regulation. Its main argument has been that since it does not seek funding from the sports ministry, it isn't answerable to it. Unlike other sports, the cricket board, an autonomous body, isn't covered under the Right to Information Act, 2005. However, with cricket returning to the Olympics in 2028, it could be forced to align with other national federations and follow the standard good governance practices. The government aims to achieve this by bringing the BCCI under the National Sports Board (NSB), as the Bill envisages. The NSB will have sweeping powers to lay down rules and oversee the functioning of all federations — from unconventional games like atya patya to mainstream sports like cricket. Indeed, sports governance issues go beyond cricket. The Bill seeks to bring in legislation to improve 'the governance of the sports bodies and achieve better results in sports and reduce the disputes and litigation, inter alia, involving sports federations'. It relies on two main pillars — the NSB will be a SEBI-like body that will govern all sports, and the creation of a National Sports Tribunal, which will take the burden away from the lower courts and high courts. With the NSB, there are fears of government overreach and the question of appointing the right people, free of conflicts of interest or bias, to head the organisation. At the same time, there are concerns that the formation of the Tribunal, which will have the powers of a civil court and decide on disputes ranging from selection to election, could disenfranchise athletes and administrators of their right to approach the courts. Whether or not the government, through this Bill, succeeds in cleaning up the messy Indian sports administration depends on whether or not it manages to enforce its provisions in letter and spirit.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Ram Madhav writes: All parties should welcome SIR
It is heartening to see the Election Commission of India (ECI) stand firm on its now-complete Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar ahead of the upcoming elections to the state legislature. The Opposition parties have been stalling Parliament, arguing that the SIR is politically motivated and intended to deprive lakhs of voters of their voting rights. They threaten to boycott elections, too. The ECI is a constitutional body with autonomous powers and responsibilities. Those critical of its actions have approached the Supreme Court. They could have gone to the ECI itself. The Supreme Court did raise some concerns and sought clarifications from the ECI, but it refused to stay the verification process as demanded by the petitioning NGOs. The ECI refused to budge before the political threats and reacted strongly to their criticism, asking whether 'fearing these things', it should 'pave the way for some to cast fake votes in the name of deceased voters, voters who have migrated permanently, or those registered in two places, fake voters or foreign voters?' India opted for universal adult franchise at the time of Independence, which was not so common even in Western countries. The US reached that stage only in 1965 through the Voting Rights Act. Full suffrage became a reality in the UK through the Representation of the People (Equal Franchise) Act, 1928. Learning about India's decision, Britain's then-Prime Minister, Clement Atlee, found it appropriate to warn Jawaharlal Nehru that 'the Asiatic republics are few and of recent establishment. Their record is not very encouraging. They tend to degenerate into dictatorships or oligarchies.' But the Indian leadership had decided, while drafting the Nehru Report in 1928, that every eligible citizen aged 21 years or above would have the right to vote. B R Ambedkar was insistent that it should be a fundamental right. However, in its wisdom, the Constituent Assembly decided to incorporate it not as a fundamental right under Part III of the Constitution, but as a constitutional right under Article 326. This distinction is important to keep in mind because too much is said about the burden of proof being shifted onto citizens under the SIR. The right to vote, being a constitutional right, is subject to scrutiny from time to time for the eligibility of a given individual. In fact, the Representation of the People Act clearly stipulates several disqualifications with respect to the right to vote. They include non-citizenship, being of unsound mind, convictions for certain offences, non-residency, and being in prison. It is in exercise of these provisions that the ECI sought to undertake this SIR. It concluded the first phase of door-to-door verification with the help of thousands of Block Level Officers (BLOs) and other officials. Setting aside criticisms, the ECI declared that 99 per cent of electors had been covered through this exercise and that it had helped the ECI identify 2.16 million voters who were dead. Another 3.15 million were found to have permanently migrated while one lakh people were untraceable. This number constitutes around 8 per cent of the total 72.1 million voters in Bihar. There shouldn't be any controversy over those who are deceased or have migrated. Less than 1 per cent of voters failed to submit their forms about whom both the political parties and the ECI should seriously bother. This is not the end of the process anyway. The revised lists of voters will be supplied to the 12 registered parties by August 1. Parties will have one full month to challenge any of the deletions since the petitioners in the Supreme Court argued that the BLOs didn't do their job 'given the impossible deadlines'. The BLOs had one month to complete this exercise during which time they were expected to visit around 300-400 households. This accounts for less than 15 houses on a given working day, a task the petitioners think is 'impossible'. They even accused those BLOs, who often belong to poor and lower-middle-class sections, of harassing, cheating, and even seeking bribes from voters. Electoral reforms are never easy. It took four decades and an officer like T N Seshan to attend to booth capturing, bogus voting and impersonation. Seshan, a courageous officer, faced innumerable challenges when he attempted to clean up electoral rolls, introduce voter ID cards and force leaders to religiously follow the Model Code of Conduct, which was otherwise considered just a piece of paper by them. Attempts were made to impeach him in Parliament at least twice. Two additional election commissioners with equal powers were added, making the Commission a three-member body to curtail Seshan's authority. Seshan determinedly fought back and took the matter to the Supreme Court. 'I have politicians for breakfast,' he once commented. Seshan's efforts resulted in major reforms. More importantly, they gave teeth to the Commission, which was until then seen by the political class as a paper tiger. Subsequent election commissioners upheld the majestic and independent role of the Commission in conducting elections in a fair and transparent manner. Over the past few decades, India's electoral system, despite being of humongous size with 960 million voters and one million polling stations, has proved to be one of the most successful and efficient systems, one that several countries wish to emulate. The occasional revision of electoral rolls is a mandatory practice in any country. Given the large-scale migration happening in our country, the Commission's decision to undertake an intensive revision of the rolls in the entire country, starting with Bihar, must be welcomed by all parties. The writer, president, India Foundation, is with the BJP. Views are personal
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
‘Don't lower the age. Just stop jailing adolescent love'
With the Supreme Court weighing in, a growing chorus of experts is calling for decriminalising consensual relationships even if the age of consent is not lowered New Delhi : With the Supreme Court hearing a pivotal case over whether to lower the statutory age of consent for sexual activity from 18 to 16 years, activists and experts working with children or dealing with cases that fall in the domain of 'consensual romantic relationships' bring into focus the various complexities and challenges the situation presents in courts and beyond for 'adolescents'. At one end is a strong view that highlights the plight of boys and girls caught in such cases — putting their dignity, liberty and right to protection as teenagers at stake. On the other end are activists, who caution that attempts to change the age of consent could present a situation that could lead to misuse and enable child marriage in the garb of 'romantic relationships'. In the case before SC, for instance, senior advocate and amicus curiae Indira Jaising has urged the court to read down the current legal threshold of 18, arguing that the existing provisions criminalise consensual adolescent relationships and infringe on constitutional rights. On the other hand, the Union govt has insisted that the age must remain 18 to safeguard minors from exploitation, warning that bringing down the age could undermine the country's child protection framework. An attempt to address the complexities was also made by the Law Commission in its report on the issue in 2023. It had advised against lowering the age of consent from 18 years. It also suggested amendments in the Pocso Act to introduce guided judicial discretion by the special court in the matter of deciding on sentencing in cases involving 'tacit approval' of minors between 16 and 18 years old. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Mini House for 60 sqm for Seniors with Toilet and Bath (Price May Surprise You) Pre Fabricated Homes | Search Ads Search Now Undo Swagata Raha, the founder of Enfold, a child rights NGO, has repeated her demand to decriminalise sexual relationships deemed 'consensual' — by creating an exception in Pocso for those aged between 16 and 18. 'We are not saying that the age of consent needs to be brought down to 16,' she told TOI . 'The current provision under Pocso, which sets the age of consent at 18, presents a situation where a romantic consensual relationship between adolescents is treated as a criminal act, on a par with sexual exploitation and rape. This is clearly damaging, and has long-term impact on the life and dignity of young people. To restore balance in law, this needs to change through the introduction of exceptions recognising consent of those above 16 years. ' At least one in four cases criminalised under Pocso is 'romantic' in nature, she said, citing empirical studies based on judgments. On the other hand, Bhuwan Ribhu, founder of Just Rights for Children, warned that lowering consent will open a Pandora's box, legitimising various forms of child rape as well as trafficking and child marriage. 'The law is being misunderstood and misinterpreted in the so-called consent debate,' he said, adding, 'No amendment to Pocso should be made until the current law is implemented in letter and spirit. With less than 10% conviction rate and compensation awarded in fewer than 1% of cases, the need of the hour is to implement the law before we amend it. ' Ribhu suggested that in 'genuine cases' of romantic consensual relationships, with appropriate checks and balances, it was possible to ensure protection without tinkering with consent. He felt Pocso could be amended to decriminalise situations, say, where there is a history of a romantic relationship between a boy and a girl and where the latter has been consistent in her statements before child protection agencies and courts, and where there is no gang rape or prior criminal history. However, child justice and criminal lawyer Anant Asthana feels that the issue can be addressed through amendments to Pocso — to create room for judges to exercise discretion with necessary checks to protect genuine cases of romantic relationships. Drawing attention to the lack of child-friendly policing, he highlighted the need to first equip police with a protocol to deal with such cases to protect the identity of the boy and girl. Advocate and founder of Independent Thought, Vikram Srivastava, said any attempt to alter the age of consent would open the doors to misuse and increase the risk of child marriage in the garb of consent, by the parents themselves, as seen in many states. 'Among socalled consensual relationships, in most cases we find they are entangled in a series of illegalities leading to elopement. Even for 'genuine consensual relationships', checks and procedural safeguards must be provided to filter genuine cases,' he said. Putting across the perspective of adolescents affected by such cases, Sonal Kapoor from Protsahan, which works with child survivors of abuse, said that blanket criminalisation of consensual adolescent relationships under Pocso, even when non-exploitative and rooted in mutual consent, stripped young people of voice, choice and agency. 'Lowering the age of consent risks weakening protections against coercion. But keeping it rigid results in young couples being dragged through criminal trials, humiliated and dehumanised by the same laws that are meant to protect them,' she said. 'The law must evolve. It must hold space for both protection of children and autonomy of young people.'
