Governor's Independence in Investigations: Legal Perspectives

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the Governor's autonomy in deciding investigations against Chief Minister Siddaramaiah amidst allegations linked to the Mysuru Urban Development Authority scam. Mehta clarified the Governor's role under Section 17(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, emphasizing that the final decision on prosecution lies with the investigating officer.

In a recent legal discourse, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta asserted that the Governor must act independently when addressing allegations against the Chief Minister, bypassing the council of ministers' advice and aid. Mehta clarified his stance in the Karnataka High Court while representing Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot.

The context of this assertion stems from allegations against Chief Minister Siddaramaiah in a site allotment scam associated with the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA). The Chief Minister, who has dismissed these accusations as baseless, filed a petition to quash the investigation and prosecution approval granted by Governor Gehlot.

Mehta outlined the Governor's limited yet crucial role under Section 17(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. He emphasized that while the Governor determines whether a prima facie case exists, the investigating officer ultimately decides if, and under what provisions, a charge sheet should be filed. The court has deferred further hearings until Monday.

(With inputs from agencies.)