Context:
Karnataka Governor sanctioned the prosecution of the Chief Minister in a case of alleged corruption in the allotment of land to his wife by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA).
Relevance:
GS II: Polity and Governance
Dimensions of the Article:
- What is the MUDA ‘Scam’?
- Powers of Sanctioning the Prosecution of the CM
- Historical Context and Comparisons
What is the MUDA ‘Scam’?
Powers of Sanctioning the Prosecution of the CM:
- The sanction for prosecution is granted under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Samhitha 2023, following petitions from social activists.
- Supreme Court’s Stance: A significant reference is made to a 2004 Supreme Court ruling emphasizing that Governors must exercise their discretion based on facts, or risk a breakdown of the rule of law.
Intention Behind the Governor’s Decision:
- Governor’s Justification: The Governor believes the evidence and allegations sufficiently indicate the commission of offenses, warranting a neutral and objective investigation.
- Criticism from the State Government: The state government criticizes this move as politically motivated, aimed at destabilizing the state’s governance, and labels it as illegal, unconstitutional, and contrary to the spirit of democracy and federalism.
Historical Context and Comparisons:
- Previous Instances: The document references past instances where Governors exercised their discretion to prosecute CMs, including a notable 1982 Supreme Court judgment supporting the Governor’s discretion in the case of Maharashtra CM A.R. Antulay, and the 1995 sanction against Tamil Nadu CM Jayalalithaa.
- Legal Precedents: These cases highlight the complex interplay between state governance and central oversight, particularly through the discretionary powers of the Governor as interpreted by judicial decisions.
-Source: Indian Express
