Karnataka High Court Issues Order Quashing FIR Against Nirmala Sitharaman and BJP’s Nalin Kumar Kateel in Electoral Bonds Case
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday issued an order quashing the FIR registered against Union Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and former state Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) president Nalin Kumar Kateel in connection with the allegation of extortion in the name of electoral bonds.
Bengaluru, December 3: The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday issued an order quashing the FIR registered against Union Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and former state Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) president Nalin Kumar Kateel in connection with the allegation of extortion in the name of electoral bonds. The petition was filed by former MP Kateel, who is also co-accused in the case.
A case was registered against Nirmala Sitharaman and others as directed by a special court following a complaint filed concerning election bond irregularities. An FIR was registered against Sitharaman, ED officials and state and national level BJP office bearers under Sections 384 (punishment for extortion), 120 B (criminal conspiracy), and 34 (acts committed by several persons with common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). BJP State President BY Vijayendra was also named in the FIR. Karnataka HC Quashes Electoral Bonds Case Against Former State BJP Chief Kateel.
The complainant alleged that the accused extorted Rs 8,000 crore under the guise of election bonds. Adarsh R Iyer, co-founder of 'Janadhikar Sangharsh Parishad' (JSP) had filed a complaint alleging that he had received excessive benefits. The complainant alleged that Sitharaman, with the help and support of ED officials, facilitated the extortion of thousands of crores of rupees for the benefit of other officials at the state and national levels. 'Why Was He Growing It? Out of Passion?': Karnataka High Court Judge Justice M Nagaprasanna Questions Lawyer Over His Client Growing Cannabis in Backyard.
In February, the Supreme Court struck down the electoral bonds scheme and declared it was unconstitutional.
(This is an unedited and auto-generated story from Syndicated News feed, LatestLY Staff may not have modified or edited the content body)