DVAC writing directly to judge not fair: Special Court

June 23, 2011 03:57 pm | Updated November 16, 2021 10:41 am IST - Bangalore

A file picture of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa during a press conference in New Delhi. Photo: S. Subramanium.

A file picture of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa during a press conference in New Delhi. Photo: S. Subramanium.

The Special Court trying the disproportionate assets case against Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa on Thursday described as “not fair” the action of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), Chennai, in directly writing a letter to the judge intimating that further investigation of the case had been taken up.

In his order, B.M. Mallikarjunaiah, Judge of the Special Court and the 36th Additional City Civil and Sessions Court, directed the DVAC to file such communications only through the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP).

The court decided to ignore the letter written by the DVAC. The court also accepted the unconditional apology submitted by DVAC Deputy Superintendent of Police G. Sambandam, who had written the letter (which was in the form of an application under Section 173(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure to intimate the court about further investigation) on behalf of the DVAC as newly appointed investigating officer of the case and condoned his action.

The court had earlier expressed displeasure with the action of the DVAC in writing the letter, on June 15, directly to the judge while by-passing the SPP, who represents the DVAC.Meanwhile, B. Kumar, senior counsel, who is now representing Ms. Jayalalithaa, sought four weeks time stating that he had to study the case as he had taken over from previous senior counsel, Navaneethakrishnan, who was appointed Advocate-General of Tamil Nadu on May 23. However, Sandesh J. Chouta, counsel assisting the Special Public Prosecutor, objected to grant of time while contending that changing of counsel was a move to delay proceedings.

Mr. Chouta argued that this is the third senior counsel appearing for Ms. Jayalalithaa since trial commenced in Bangalore and every such time, time was sought by new counsel for preparation with an “intention to delay” proceedings. The judge adjourned proceedings to July 8 to enable new counsel to prepare for the case.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.