Continued from Page 1
“I am of the opinion that the denotification order passed by accused no. 1 is only a superfluous once since 131.07 acres of land at Rachenahalli, including in survey no. 55/2, was denotified on 17.5.2004 itself by the then Chief Minister S.M. Krishna ... Thus, there is no iota of evidence to show that accused no. 1 misused his official position to show favour to his kins,” it has been held in the judgment of the CBI court.
It was alleged that Prerana Trust received Rs. 20 crore as donation from four sister concerns of JSW Steel Ltd. as quid pro quo for showing undue favour to JSW Steel by Mr. Yeddyurappa in carrying out mining activities.
It was also alleged that Mr. Yeddyurappa’s order to ban export of iron ore on July 28, 2010 as the Chief Minister was aimed at favouring JSW Steel, which was in need of iron ore for domestic purpose and ban gave an advantage to the company to fix price for purchasing ore.
And JSW Steel, on the same day, through its sister concern, South West Mining Company, entered into an agreement to purchase lands from Mr. Yeddyurappa’s sons and son-in-law for an exorbitant price of Rs. 20 crore though market value of it was only around R. 5 crore.
But the court said that “neither there is a demand nor acceptance of illegal gratification by accused number 1 [Mr. Yeddyurappa] as such the question of raising presumption under Section 20(1) of the PC Act against accused number 1 does not at all arise in this case.”
Iron ore export ban
Also, the court held that “there was overwhelming evidence” on record to hold that Mr. Yeddyurappa’s order to ban export of iron ore was a “collective decision of the government taken to prevent illegal mining and export of ore …” and “there was no iota of evidence” to prove that Mr. Yeddyurappa took the decision for “extraneous reasons”.
The court also held that the question of Mr. Yeddyurappa’s sons and son-in-law either inducing him or exercising their personal influence on him does not arise as it has held that Mr. Yeddyurappa had not shown any illegal favour to JSW Steel and there was no demand or acceptance of illegal gratification.
The court pronounced the verdict while acquitting them from all the charges framed mainly under Section 120B, 420 and 109 of the India Penal Code and Sections 7, 9, 11, 12, 13 (2), 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
