BMIC Project Labeled Huge Fraud by High Court Amid Calls for Forensic Audit

Judicial Condemnation of Infrastructure Project

The High Court of Karnataka has issued a scathing assessment of the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor (BMIC), describing it as one of the state’s most significant scams. On July 29, 2026, a division bench comprising Justice D.K. Singh and Justice T.M. Nadaf asserted that the project warrants an independent investigation supported by a forensic audit of accounts to address allegations of fraud and criminal activity.

However, the court voiced skepticism regarding such a probe, suggesting the state government served as an accomplice. The bench observed that Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises (NICE) and associated proponents were permitted to generate illegal profits by diverting land in violation of the Framework Agreement (FWA), capitalizing assets without authorization, and neglecting compensation requirements for a vast land bank.

Failure of Public Purpose

The ruling came as the court dismissed appeals from NICE and the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB). These appeals challenged a July 2025 judgment that invalidated the acquisition of numerous acres. The court found that the KIADB failed to pass awards for the lands despite 23 years elapsing since final notifications were issued.

The bench highlighted several critical grievances:

• Landowners and farmers were deprived of their livelihoods without the constitutional compensation mandated by Article 300A.
• NICE failed to meet its primary objectives: the development of five townships and a 111-kilometer expressway to link Bengaluru and Mysuru.
• Evidence shows that despite claims of land shortages, the state previously informed the Supreme Court that NICE received 554 acres of excess land.
• Environmental damage occurred through the drying up of local lakes.

Systemic Oversight and State Accountability

While NICE argued that the Supreme Court had previously upheld the acquisition's legality, the division bench clarified that the current dispute centers on the unsustainable 20-year delay in finalizing awards. This timeline, the court ruled, effectively renders the acquisition proceedings void.

The judges also questioned why the state government has not canceled the project despite acknowledging numerous violations. The bench concluded that while the project was originally conceived for the public good, it has ultimately functioned solely to serve the private interests of its proponents at the expense of public welfare and taxpayer resources.

Source: The Hindu — National