The Supreme Court on Monday asked why the Enforcement Directorate was being used for “political battles”, and said that such battles must be fought outside the court, Bar and Bench reported.

A bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran rejected an appeal filed by the agency against a Karnataka High Court decision to quash the summons issued to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s wife Parvathi in an alleged land scam

“…Please do not force us to say something,” Bar and Bench quoted the bench as saying. “Otherwise we have to say something very harsh about the Enforcement Directorate. Let political battles be fought among the electorate. Why are you being used for it?”

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the Enforcement Directorate, agreed to withdraw the appeal. “But let it not be treated as a precedent,” Raju added. While rejecting the petition, the bench also said that there was no error in the reasoning adopted by the High Court in the matter.

The alleged scam pertains to the allotment of 14 high-value housing sites in Mysuru’s Vijaynagar area to Parvathi, in 2021 by the Mysore Urban Development Authority under a state government scheme.

This was allegedly done in exchange for 3.1 acres of land that Parvathi owned in another part of the city. The land was allegedly illegally acquired from Dalit families.

On September 25, a special court in Bengaluru ordered a Lokayukta police investigation against Siddaramaiah after the Karnataka High Court upheld the sanction granted by Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot to prosecute him.

On September 27, the Lokayukta police registered a first information report against Siddaramaiah, Parvathi, her brother Mallikarjuna Swamy and a person named Devaraju.

Swamy had reportedly purchased the land in question from Devaraju and gifted it to Parvathi.

On October 1, Parvathi offered to return the 14 plots in question. This came after the Enforcement Directorate booked Siddaramaiah under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act in connection with the alleged scam.

While the Lokayukta police said in its closure report that it found no evidence against Siddaramaiah, it alleged that the 50:50 site allotment policy followed by former Mysuru Urban Development Authority commissioner DB Natesh and his predecessors led to substantial losses to the state exchequer, according to the Deccan Herald. The anti-corruption ombudsman sought permission to investigate their actions.

The Enforcement Directorate had filed a protest petition against the Lokayukta police’s closure report.

In April, the special court allowed the Lokayukta police to conduct further investigation into the alleged land scam involving Siddaramaiah. However, it deferred its decision on a closure report submitted by the anti-corruption ombudsman. It said that the question of whether to accept the report would be kept pending till the Lokayukta police filed its final report.

Meanwhile, Justice M Nagaprasanna of the High Court on March 7 quashed the summons issued by central agency to Parvathi. Subsequently, the Enforcement Directorate filed an appeal before the Supreme Court, which was heard on Monday.