Supreme Court refused to hear a plea claiming threats to capture property at the behest of Karnataka CM. Court allowed withdrawal and told petitioners to approach the Karnataka High Court for relief.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a petition that alleged Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah was orchestrating threats in connection with an attempt to take over a property. The Court advised the petitioners to seek appropriate relief before the jurisdictional High Court instead.
The matter was heard by a bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta. During the hearing, the counsel appearing for the petitioners told the Court that due to continuous threats, the petitioner was unable to enter Karnataka and was currently forced to stay in Delhi.
ALSO READ: Bengaluru Court Clears CM Siddaramaiah in Rs 68 Crore Ad Revenue Loss Case
Taking note of the submissions, the bench questioned the seriousness and extent of the allegations, asking,
“Is the Karnataka chief minister sending people after you in Delhi?”
In response, the counsel clarified,
“Not in Delhi; it is in Karnataka.”
The petitioner’s lawyer further explained that the individual wanted to return to Karnataka but was unable to do so because of safety concerns.
ALSO READ: Karnataka Lokayukta Gives Clean Chit to CM Siddaramaiah and Family in MUDA Case
He argued,
“Despite filing repeated police complaints and obtaining court orders in my favour, the threats continue.”
Highlighting the gravity of the situation, the counsel also referred to an alleged incident in January involving violence at the disputed property. He stated that there had been stone pelting and acts of vandalism, adding,
“They want to capture the property.”
However, the bench was not convinced that the Supreme Court was the appropriate forum to address the grievance at this stage. The judges questioned why the petitioner had not approached the Karnataka High Court, which has territorial jurisdiction over the matter. Responding to this, the counsel said,
“The problem is that because of these threats, I am unable to enter the state of Karnataka. I am forced to live in Delhi.”
During the course of the hearing, the Court also referred to a committee and asked whether the petitioner was heading it, raising concerns about the broader context of the dispute.
ALSO READ: Karnataka HC Dismisses Petition Against CM Siddaramaiah’s Varuna Election Victory
The Supreme Court observed that the case appeared to have elements of a political dispute being brought before the judiciary. It remarked that the petitioner seemed to be engaged in a “political battle” in court. The counsel, however, denied any political motive and maintained that the petitioner had no political inclination.
As the bench indicated its unwillingness to entertain the plea, the counsel requested permission to withdraw the petition. The Court allowed the request and dismissed the plea as withdrawn, while granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate High Court for relief.
This order reinforces the principle that matters involving local disputes and factual issues should generally be addressed first before the concerned High Courts, especially when alternative remedies are available under the law.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on CM Siddaramaiah
