BENGALURU: A notice was served on Hassan Member of Parliament Shreyas Patel on Friday with regard to non-disclosure details of some of the properties owned by him at the time of filing of nominations during parliamentary elections-2024. The notice to Shreyas Patel asked him to appear for hearing on October 6.
In the election, Shreyas Patel, a Congress nominee defeated Prajwal Revanna, consensus nominee of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Janata Dal Secular (JDS). Earlier Prajwal Revanna represented Hassan parliamentary seat from 2019-2024. Currently, Prajwal Revanna is convicted for life imprisonment in a rape case and lodged in Central Prison, Bengaluru.
On Friday morning, election agent during the 2024 Lok Sabha election and advocate Poornachandra Tejasvi descended at the office of Member of Parliament, Hassan and pasted a copy of Supreme Court notice at the entrance door of office.
Later, advocate and petitioner Poornachandra Tejasvi told reporters he moved the High Court seeking disqualification of Shreyas Patel as Lok Sabha member over his non-disclosure of his assets in his affidavit while filing his nomination. The High Court dismissed Interlocutory Application and later knocked the doors of the Supreme Court.
The petitioner stated grandfather of Shreyas Patel late G. Puttaswamy Gowda, also a former Lok Sabha member, owned lands in Krishnaraja Puarm of Bengaluru and a couple of days before he filed his nominations for Lok Sabha polls-2024, Shreyas Patel paid the taxes.
Adding, he said, but Patel failed to mention it in his election affidavit along with some other details of properties owned by Hassan Lok Sabha member (amounting to disqualification). The lands owned by grandfather of Shreyas Patel cost crores of rupees in the market for which the Hassan MP paid taxes. The petitioner exuded confidence of securing “justice” in the case and stated that he would serve the SC notice to the Lok Sabha member by hand as well.
Reacting to the Supreme Court notice on him, Shreyas Patel said he would respond to the notice appropriately and pointed out the High Court of Karnataka had dismissed the petition earlier.