The Karnataka High Court has escalated its scrutiny over the delay in implementing its orders to clear encroachments in the controversial land case involving Union Minister of Heavy Industries HD Kumaraswamy. In a strongly worded observation during the latest hearing, the court expressed serious displeasure, questioning why its earlier directives remained unfulfilled. It made it clear that failure to act could lead to imprisonment for the officials responsible, signaling that the judiciary is prepared to take harsh measures to enforce compliance.
The court’s sharp criticism was directed at the Revenue Department, which it accused of dragging its feet. Government advocates informed the bench that 14 acres of encroached land in Kethaganahalli, Ramanagara District, had been cleared, but over 70 acres still remain under dispute. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been set up to investigate the remaining encroachments and those responsible for them. However, the court was far from satisfied with this partial progress. It issued a summons to the Principal Secretary of the Revenue Department, ordering them to personally appear at the next hearing scheduled for March 19.
Presiding over the case, the division bench led by Justice Somashekhar stressed that judicial orders are not optional and must be followed without delay or obstruction — especially when public land and powerful individuals are involved. The court warned that continued defiance would invite contempt proceedings, potentially resulting in jail time for officials failing to comply.
Kumaraswamy, who has consistently maintained his innocence, responded with defiance. He claimed the land survey and investigation were politically motivated, accusing the Congress-led Siddaramaiah government of orchestrating a campaign to tarnish his reputation. He criticized the SIT’s structure, sarcastically remarking, "Earlier, SITs were under IPS officers, now they are under IAS officers too," implying that political influence had seeped into the investigation.
He further asserted that the Kethaganahalli land was legally purchased by him back in 1984 and accused his rivals of dragging his name through the mud for political gain. "Unlike Siddaramaiah, I have not looted government land. Let them investigate — I have nothing to hide," he declared, framing himself as a victim of targeted harassment.
Kumaraswamy also took aim at the survey process itself, alleging that it was carried out without prior notice and questioning the sudden emergence of complaints against him. He hinted at a larger conspiracy, suggesting that certain influential figures were manipulating the situation to sideline him politically. He even claimed to possess records implicating other prominent figures in illegal land deals, hinting that the investigation could unearth more than what the Congress-led government anticipated.
The situation has evolved from a legal dispute into a full-blown political battle, with Kumaraswamy positioning himself as a fighter against what he calls a "vindictive" government. His supporters, including members of the Janata Dal (Secular), have rallied behind him, accusing the Congress of using state machinery to silence opposition voices.
Meanwhile, the High Court remains resolute, determined to ensure that the encroachments are cleared, regardless of the political storm surrounding the case. The next hearing on March 19 is set to be pivotal — not just for Kumaraswamy, but for the government officials tasked with enforcing the court’s orders. If they fail to demonstrate significant progress, they may face legal consequences, adding another layer of drama to an already high-stakes case.
The fallout from this case could have far-reaching implications, potentially reshaping the political landscape in Karnataka. For Kumaraswamy, it’s no longer just about the land — it’s about his political survival and legacy. For the Congress government, it’s a test of its commitment to fighting corruption, even if it means taking on a powerful opposition leader. And for the High Court, it’s a matter of upholding the rule of law, ensuring that no one — no matter how influential — is above judicial orders.
