Defending Thursday evening’s State Cabinet decision to withdraw consent given to CBI probing the disproportionate assets cases of Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Friday said that the then Chief Minister had ordered CBI investigation without taking consent from the Speaker and without considering the opinion of the then Advocate-General.
“Not taking the Speaker’s consent and not considering the Advocate-General’s opinion is not in accordance with the law,” he told reporters after inaugurating the Bangalore City Safe City Command Centre building here on Friday.
“Permission of the government is necessary for any investigation against a government servant. Mr. Shivakumar was an MLA in 2019 when the probe was sanctioned. The investigation against him should be legally sanctioned by the Assembly Speaker. But this was not considered by the then Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa and he had orally instructed the Chief Secretary,” Mr. Siddaramaiah said.
“I will not comment on the court’s decision. It was not right on the part of the government to sanction it illegally. Hence, the decision was taken to withdraw the sanction for investigation,” he said.
Responding to a question if the government had taken this decision being apprehensive about the court’s decision to uphold the order on November 29, Mr. Siddaramaiah said: “we will not interfere in the verdicts of the court. Let the court decide.”
Meanwhile, refusing to comment on the issue, Mr. Shivakumar said that those who attended the Cabinet will speak. “I came to know of the decision through media reports,” he said.
Home Minister G. Parameshwara told reporters that the government will inform the court about the Cabinet decision. It is up to the court and CBI to take next action, he said in Bengaluru. He said the government cannot continue the illegalities committed by the previous government.
Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Minister Priyank Kharge said the government will defend the decision in any forum, including the court and the legislature. “The decision is within the purview of the constitution. The earlier consent was politically motivated. There are three Supreme Court decisions in this respect,” he said, providing details of the communication. He said that the Enforcement Directorate as part of protocol intimated the State government but did not ask for CBI enquiry.
