Karnataka’s Chief Minister Siddaramaiah dismissed allegations of bribery linked to an election petition. The court hearing, presided over by Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav, was in response to an election petition filed by a voter contesting Siddaramaiah’s election from the Varuna assembly constituency. The proceedings resulted in an adjournment of the hearing until April 18.
Karnataka: Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah appeared before the Karnataka High Court on April 1 to address allegations that the Congress party’s election manifesto constituted bribery during the 2023 Karnataka Legislative Assembly elections.
READ ALSO: BJP Defamation Case|| Bengaluru Court Re-issues Summons CM Siddaramaiah, DK Shivakumar
The court hearing, presided over by Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav, was in response to an election petition filed by a voter contesting Siddaramaiah’s election from the Varuna assembly constituency. The proceedings resulted in an adjournment of the hearing until April 18.
Senior Advocate Ravivarma Kumar, representing Siddaramaiah, argued that there was no evidence to support the claims and questioned the credibility of the petition.
Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah defended himself against bribery allegations raised in an election petition during a recent court hearing. The petitioner argued that the Congress party’s election manifesto, which outlined five guarantees for the people of Karnataka, amounted to bribery and undue influence, violating Section 123(2) of The Representation of the People Act.
READ ALSO: Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah Appeals to Supreme Court to Quash Traffic Blocking FIR
Senior Advocate Ravivarma Kumar, representing Siddaramaiah, emphasized that there was no substantiating evidence regarding the timing, location, or nature of the alleged actions aimed at enticing voters. He asserted that the allegations made in the petition lacked a factual basis.
Kumar further pointed out errors in the petition, including the misspelling of the Chief Secretary’s name, and questioned the petitioner’s attention to detail.
In response, advocate Pramila Nesargi, representing the petitioner, acknowledged the possibility of a mistake but suggested that it did not emphasized the overall merits of the petition. She argued against scrutinizing the petition’s details excessively, urging the court to focus on the substantive allegations.
The court adjourned the hearing to April 18, allowing both parties to present their arguments and evidence comprehensively. The Karnataka High Court previously issued notice in the matter on July 28, indicating the seriousness with which the case is being treated.
