Karnataka HC Quashes ED Summons to CM’s Wife, Minister in MUDA Land Case
Last Updated on March 11, 2025 by Amit Patra
In a significant legal victory for Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s family, the Karnataka High Court on Friday quashed the Enforcement Directorate’s summons issued to his wife Parvathi and Minister B.S. Suresh in the controversial Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) land allotment case.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna delivered the succinct order with just three words—”Allowed and quashed”—bringing temporary relief in a case that has caused political turbulence in the state. The court had reserved its judgment last month after extensive arguments from all parties.
At the heart of the legal dispute was whether the ED could invoke the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) when the alleged “proceeds of crime”—14 sites allegedly illegally allotted by MUDA—had already been surrendered by Parvathi. Her counsel, Senior Advocate Sandesh J. Chouta, argued that PMLA provisions couldn’t be triggered without ongoing enjoyment of illicit gains.
“Just the existence of dirty money is not enough for PMLA. To attract provisions of PMLA, unless there is activity in furtherance of proceeds of crime, PMLA will not be attracted,” Chouta had contended, emphasizing that the sites were returned to MUDA on October 1, 2024, before ED’s investigation commenced.
The defense also highlighted procedural concerns, claiming the ED had registered its Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) “in haste” immediately after the Lokayukta police filed an FIR based on court directions, potentially creating jurisdictional overlap.
Minister Suresh’s counsel, Senior Advocate C.V. Nagesh, questioned his client’s inclusion in the investigation altogether, noting he assumed office only in June 2023, well after the alleged illegal allotments took place, and was “an utter stranger to MUDA” before then.
The ED, represented by Additional Solicitor General Arvind Kamath, had vigorously opposed the pleas, arguing the investigation went far beyond the 14 sites, describing them as merely “a tip of the iceberg” in what they characterized as systematic corruption in site allocations.
The court’s decision comes amid reports that the Lokayukta police may be preparing to file a “B report” (closure report) in their parallel investigation against the accused, potentially further complicating the ED’s case.
