New Delhi – In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India strongly criticized the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for its actions in a politically sensitive case involving Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s wife, B.M. Parvathi, and State Minister Byrathi Suresh. The apex court emphasized that political conflicts should be settled through democratic processes and not by misusing investigative agencies.
The case concerns a controversial land allotment by the Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA), where B.M. Parvathi was allegedly granted a prime plot in exchange for previously acquired land, leading to accusations of irregularities and corruption worth crores of rupees. Minister Byrathi Suresh was also reportedly linked to the same case.
After ED issued summons to Parvathi, she approached the Karnataka High Court, which stayed the summons. The ED challenged this stay before the Supreme Court. During the hearing on July 21, 2025, a bench comprising Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran questioned the ED’s impartiality and its involvement in politically sensitive investigations.
Chief Justice Gavai remarked, “Political battles should be fought before the electorate. Why is the ED allowing itself to be used in such matters?” Addressing Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, who appeared for the ED, he warned, “Please do not compel us to say things we would rather not. Otherwise, we will have to use harsh words against the ED. Unfortunately, I have personal experience with this in Maharashtra. Don’t spread it across the country.”
Subsequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the ED’s plea and upheld the Karnataka High Court’s stay, marking a major legal setback for the agency and, indirectly, for the central government.
Welcoming the verdict, CM Siddaramaiah said, “Justice has finally been served. This is a slap in the face of the Centre’s vindictive politics. Misusing institutions for political revenge must stop, or else the people will respond.”
Political analysts see the verdict as a major blow to the credibility of the ED and a public rejection of alleged political misuse of central agencies. Critics argue that continued partisanship may erode the agency’s institutional reputation and question its independence.
The judgment may compel the ED to re-evaluate its operational conduct, especially in cases with political ramifications.
(This is a rewritten version of an article originally authored by Akhilesh Tripathi and published in India Tomorrow)
