Given the delay from the district administrations of Ramanagaram and Tumakuru to reply to repeated reminders from the chief electoral officers, many officers now doubt if any clarity will emerge on the “glaring differences” they point out between the affidavits filed by H.D. Kumaraswamy and his wife Anitha Kumaraswamy.
For instance, Mr. Kumaraswamy in his affidavit, while contesting for the Assembly polls of 2008 and Lok Sabha polls of 2009, stated that his wife had a loan of Rs. 8.3 crore with Karur Vysya Bank. But, Mrs. Kumaraswamy, who contested the Madhugiri byelection in Tumakuru district in 2008, put the figure at 23 lakh.
Another glaring contradiction is that Mr. Kumaraswamy declared an investment of Rs. 4 crore by his wife in two private firms, however, her affidavit had no such mention.
The complaint, regarding differences in the three electoral affidavits filed in close succession, was first made on December 18, 2012, by Wing Commander G.B. Atri (retd).
Karnataka Chief Electoral Officer Anil Kumar Jha wrote to the Deputy Commissioners of Ramanagaram and Tumakuru districts ‘to look into the allegations of the complainant’ on December 24, 2012.
The office of the Chief Electoral Office sent repeated reminders to the two district administrations. “However, nothing moved and no inquiry was initiated,” Mr. Atri said. The activist has now approached the Karnataka Information Commission.
Tumakuru Deputy Commissioner K.S. Satyamurthy denied any knowledge of such a case. However, The Hindu has in its possession a letter written on February 4, 2014, to the returning officer, Deputy Secretary, Tumakuru Zilla Panchayat seeking an inquiry report into the allegations of the discrepancies in the affidavit.
Ramanagaram Deputy Commissioner F.R. Jamdar directed this reporter to tahsildar Basavaraj, who said that the complainant had to approach a court, as they had no power to scrutinise electoral affidavits after the completion of the election process.
