In a significant turn of events, Karnataka’s Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar received a major reprieve ahead of the Lok Sabha polls as the Supreme Court dismissed a high-profile money laundering case against him. The case, dating back to 2018, involved allegations of tax evasion and hawala transactions amounting to crores of rupees.
The Congress leader had faced arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials in September 2019 in connection with this case, but he was granted bail by the Delhi High Court the following month. Throughout the legal proceedings, Shivakumar had consistently maintained his innocence, attributing the accusations to political vendetta orchestrated by the BJP and expressing unwavering confidence in the judicial system.
The ED’s investigation into Shivakumar was initiated subsequent to Income Tax department raids on properties associated with him and his associates in 2017, during which cash amounting to nearly ₹300 crore was reportedly seized. Shivakumar vehemently contested these claims, alleging that the cash was linked to the BJP.
The Supreme Court’s decision today hinged on a crucial legal interpretation regarding the invocation of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in cases of criminal conspiracy, governed by Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The apex court clarified that criminal conspiracy would only qualify as a scheduled offence under the PMLA if it pertains to activities specified in the Act’s schedule. This ruling reaffirmed a precedent set by the court in November last year.
While the ED has expressed its intent to seek a review of this ruling, the court’s decision today stands firm, offering respite to Shivakumar. The Congress leader had previously petitioned the Karnataka High Court seeking the dismissal of ED’s summons, and upon exhausting all legal avenues, he approached the Supreme Court for relief.
Meanwhile, another corruption case involving Shivakumar remains embroiled in controversy in Karnataka, with the state government recently revoking permission for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the matter. This move has sparked a fierce political debate, with the CBI challenging the state government’s decision in court.
Sources By Agencies
