BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, the original complainant in the Rs. 53 crore disproportionate assets case against the former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa, on Tuesday complained to the Supreme Court that he was not being allowed to argue or make oral submissions in the appeal hearings before the Karnataka High Court.
In an urgent mentioning before a three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India H.L. Dattu, Mr. Swamy related how the Special Bench of the High Court on Monday did not let him make oral submissions during a hearing on the appeals filed by Ms. Jayalalithaa and the three co-accused in the case.
“Mr. Swamy, here the role of a complainant is taken over by the public prosecutor. Otherwise, we will have to rewrite the Criminal Procedure Code,” Chief Justice Dattu responded.
When Mr. Swamy sought a clarification on the apex court’s earlier orders in the case, the Chief Justice observed that the court had only said that Mr. Swamy may be permitted to “assist” the prosecution and not make oral submissions in court.
But Mr. Swamy countered that “this is not just a criminal case, it is a corruption case,” and the Prevention of Corruption Act allowed an original complainant to act as “deemed public prosecutor.”
However, Chief Justice Dattu asked him to obtain a formal order from the High Court first. “We do not know what transpired during the hearing. Please ask the High Court to pass an order,” the Chief Justice orally observed.
In December 2014, the Supreme Court had asked the Karnataka High Court Chief Justice to set up a Special Bench to “exclusively” hear the appeals filed by Ms. Jayalalithaa, Sasikala, Ilavarasi and Sudhakaran on a day-to-day basis and complete it in three months.
The apex court had also extended their bail till April 18, 2015. The trial court found Ms. Jayalalithaa and her co-accused guilty of amassing wealth disproportionate to their known sources of income to the tune of Rs. 53 crore.
All you need to about the Jayalalithaa disproportionate assets case:
Twists and Turns
- › The charges: Conspiracy: As CM, Jayalalithaa conspired with three others to acquire assets to the tune of Rs. 66.65 crore
- › Disproportionate Assets: The assets were disproportionate to her known income
- › Abetment: The other three abetted the offence by acting as benami owners of 32 private firms
- › Prosecution's take: Modus operandi was to deposit cash in benami firms’ accounts
- › Prosecution's take: The firms gave her address as theirs while opening accounts
- › Prosecution's take: Ms. Jayalalithaa spent crores of rupees on renovations and constructions, her foster son’s wedding and possessed huge quantity of jewellery.
- › Counter: Prosecution born and out of malice and vendetta, many illegalities and defects in investigation. She had sufficient income form legal sources. Others were not benamidars.
- › Counter: No material to show sarees, watches and footwear seized were bought during her tenure.
- › Counter: Income-Tax authorities and Tribunals have accepted their returns and valuation of assets.