Pass fresh order to probe site allotted to Kharge family trust in Bengaluru: HC to special court
Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge with son and Karnataka Home Minister Priyank Kharge. | Photo credit: File photo
The Karnataka High Court has accused a special court of dropping the procedure of ordering a Lokayukta police inquiry into allegations of illegal allotment of an amenity site in Bengaluru to the family trust of Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge and instead conducting an inquiry on its own under the leadership of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNS) only into technical glitches in v2023’S, a single affidavit.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the order while partially allowing a petition filed by Vijayaraghava Marathe, state president of Lanchamuktha Karnataka Vedike, Bengaluru. The petitioner challenged the special court’s August 11 order to initiate an investigation under Section 223 of the BNSS itself instead of considering his request for an investigation by the Lokayukta police.
The special court refused to proceed according to § 175 paragraph 3 due to a “defective affidavit” submitted by the complainant, which lacked proper verification according to § 333 paragraph 2 BNSS. The Special Court concluded that it could not order an investigation without a valid affidavit and thus resorted to conducting its own investigation.
However, the High Court found that the ineligibility in the applicant’s affidavit was a “remediable defect”, as even failure to submit the affidavit itself was considered a “remediable defect” by the Supreme Court, stating that the special court must give the applicant an opportunity to correct the defects before issuing orders on the merits.
The complaint relates to serious irregularities in the allocation of a plot of civic amenities with an area of 8,002 km2. m BTM 4th Stage, Bengaluru, in 2010 to Siddartha Vihar Trust — a charitable trust of Mallikarjun Kharge, Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, his wife Radhabai M. Kharge, son-in-law Radhakrishna, sons Rahul M. Kharge and Priyank M. Kharge.
According to the complainant, the trust, despite having secular objectives “for the benefit of all persons irrespective of caste, creed, religion, sex or colour”, allegedly projected itself as a Scheduled Caste (SC) institution to secure a 50% concession on the rental amount from the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) in 2009 and to obtain an alternative plot worth around ₹130 in ₹230 instead of the site allotted earlier in Banashhankari 6th Stage Layout during the year 2009.
The complainant alleged that the trustees used their influence to speed up the allotment process, which was completed in an unusually short period of 10 days. Mr. Marathe filed a complaint in the Special Court in 2025 because the jurisdictional police and Superintendent of Police, Lokayukta Police, did not act on his complaints.
Although the High Court did not comment on the merits of antitrust charges, it stated that “a trial court inquiry cannot be a substitute for an investigation if the investigation itself is necessary to find evidence”, particularly in cases of corruption against public officials, as complainants cannot file all materials available in official records.
Questions — who handled the request for the civic amenities page? On what basis was the trust treated as falling under the SC category? What were the notes in the official files? Does the official record confirm or refute the allegations? — are all matters beyond the reach of the appellant, the high court said.
The answers to these questions “lie buried, if at all, in official records and in the circumstances surrounding official decision-making. To dig them up is a matter of investigation, not just judicial inquiry,” Justice Nagaprasanna observed, directing the special court to issue a fresh order under the procedure under Section 175 of the BNSS.
Published – 8 Sep 2026 20:36 IST