anil kohli · @anilkohli54
7th Mar 2012 from Twitlonger
@KiranKS @Timesnow @Ibnlive @NDTV
Tweet by KiranKs on HC of Karnataka Judgment on BSY case. 25 tweet excerpts from Karnataka High Court judgment quashing Santosh Hegde's report based FIR against #BSY from: http://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/scrolls/wp-44071-11.pdf
@KiranKS #BSY 25) In Page 54, Judges: "we view that Yeddyurappa was condemned unheard. This is flagrant VIOLATION of principle of natural justice"!!!
@KiranKS #BSY 24) Page 53 of HC Judgment: "Mining leases to citied companies were grnated in Sep 2007, when BS Yeddyurappa was NOT a CM" (HDK was CM)
@KiranKS #BSY 23) Pg 53: "In a nut shell, there is NO material placed on record to establish that BSY has shown any official flavour to mining comp"!
@KiranKS #BSY 22) Pg 52 of HC Judgment: "Hegde's contention that he didn't ask BSY to vacate office, so no hearing was granted, does NOT hold water"
@KiranKS #BSY 21) Page 51 of Judgment: "Suspicion cannot be a ground to tarnish image & reputation of a person who is holding a constitutional post"!
@KiranKS #BSY 20) Pg 43-44 of HC Judgement: "Reputation of a man is a very precious thing. No Person should be deprived of such right to Reputation"
@KiranKS #BSY 19) Pg 37 "Whether sanction granted by Governor for criminal proceedings against BSY liable to be quashed?". Judge:"In the AFFIRMATIVE"
@KiranKS #BSY 18) Page 37. "Whether prima facie case is made by Lokayukta for registering a case against Yeddyurappa?". Judge: "In the NEGATIVE"!!
@KiranKS #BSY 17) Page 36-37 "Whether Lokayukta's report chapter 22 is within the scope set by Government?". The Judge observes : "In the NEGATIVE"!!
@KiranKS #BSY 16) In pages 21-29, Ashok Harnahalli makes splendid case againt Santosh Hegde of violating Yeddyurappa natural justice! Superb examples
@KiranKS #BSY 15) Page 21: Lawyer- "Lokayukta registered 2 cases (Sirajin Basha land deal plus mining) FIR for alleged crime. Impermissable by law!"
@KiranKS #BSY 14) Pg20 of HC Judgment: Lawyer - "Registration of FIR (against BSY) by Lokayukta Police for offence under sec 7,8,9 & 13 were ILLEGAL"
@KiranKS #BSY 13) Page 17 of HC Judgment: Lawyer - "Santosh Hegde did NOT even refer to UV Singh's observations bef initiating criminal proceedings".
@KiranKS #BSY 12) Pg 16: "UV Singh (Lokayukta staff) recorded, his observations are NOT conclusive on ground. Glaring contradictions existed in rpt".
@KiranKS #BSY 11) Pg 16: Lawyer - "Governor ALSO erred in not giving Yeddyurappa an opportunity of hearing, before sanction of criminal proceedings".
@KiranKS #BSY 10) Page 16 of HC Judgment: Lawyer - "Lokayukta ERRED in coming to the conclusion that Yeddyurappa has committed the alleged offenses".
@KiranKS #BSY 9) Page 15: Ashok Harnahalli pleaded for BSY stating Lokayukta erred in recommending criminal proceedings on ground of SUSPICION.
@KiranKS #BSY 8) Pg 13: Lokayukta in his press conference said report is LEAKED and contents are true. Held BSY guilty EVEN before rpt was submitted!
@KiranKS #BSY 7) Page 13 of HC Judgement: But Lokayukta didn't give any opportunity to Yeddyurappa for explanation.(unlike Dharam Singh, Congress CM)
@KiranKS #BSY 6) Page 13 of HC Judgement: Lokayukta submitted irregularity report against Dharam Singh.But was NOT accepted by Governor of Karnataka!
@KiranKS #BSY 5) Page 8: "The entire exercise was undertaken in a manner so as to benefit only a select FEW individuals/entities". Hello SM Krishna:)
@KiranKS #BSY 4) Pg8 about SM Krishna: "Distribution of public assets to select private individuals WITHOUT regard to their prof/tech/biz background"
@KiranKS #BSY 3) Page 7 of HC Judgment cites, Govt order from 15-Mar-2003 de-reserving 11620 sq KM of state land for mining. SM Krishna was the CM!
@KiranKS #BSY 2) Justice Bhaktavatsala asked Lokayukta to quash relevant portion of the report from 27.7.2011, chapter 22. (page 4). Why? Read on.
@KiranKS #BSY 1) Yeddyurappa filed a petition with Karnataka High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India to quash Lokayukta FIR.