Picking holes in the Karnataka High Court Judge C.R. Kumaraswamy’s math in the judgment acquitting former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa and three others, the Opposition parties have urged the Karnataka government to appeal in the Supreme Court.
In a statement, DMK president M. Karunanidhi said Mr. Justice Kumarasamy had acquitted Ms. Jayalalithaa and others contending that they had not amassed Rs. 66 crore as accused. Pointing out that it was miscalculated, he had given a verdict contradicting the trial court’s judgment.
In his judgment, the judge had given a list of the loans taken by Ms. Jayalalithaa and others which have to be construed as Ms. Jayalalithaa’s income. Detailing the loans, Mr. Karunanidhi said the judge had worked it out to Rs. 24,17,31,274. “But, if anyone who can do addition is asked to do the math, the total would come to only Rs. 10,67,31,274,” he said, adding that it was based on this “calculation” that the HC judge had acquitted Ms. Jayalalithaa.
Similarly, the judge has undervalued the Poes Garden property and the expenses incurred during Sudhakaran’s marriage but has not explained any basis. As the verdict was based on these numbers, it raises the doubt that the verdict was “altered” and “rewritten” at a later stage, Mr. Karunanidhi alleged.
The explanation could be obtained only from the Supreme Court, he said, urging the Karnataka government to appeal in the apex court as the Special Public Prosecutor himself had recommended it.
Alleging that there were plenty of loopholes in the judgment, Pattali Makkal Katchi leader S. Ramadoss claimed that the difference between Ms. Jayalaliathaa’s income and the assets purchased by her would be Rs. 16,32,36,812 if the figures given in the judgment are “correctly calculated.” “This is 76.75 per cent above her income,” he said.
Hence, even if the guidelines of the Krishnanand Agnihothri case or Andhra Pradesh government circular are cited as examples, Ms. Jayalalithaa and her associates could not be relieved from the case, he pointed out.
Meanwhile, TNCC president EVKS Elangovan said that while Justice Michael D'Cunha’s 1136-page verdict in September had valued Ms. Jayalalithaa’s assets as on April 1, 1996 at Rs. 55 crore, Mr. Justice Kumaraswamy has “underestimated” the value at Rs. 2.82 crore.
Questioning the estimation of the expenses incurred on Sudhakaran’s wedding, Mr. Elangovan said it was perplexing how the High Court judge undervalued the expenses, given that even the public knew how extravagant the wedding was. Further, pointing to loans taken by Ms. Jayalalithaa, Dr. Ramadoss said the numbers simply did not add up.
CPI(M) State secretary G. Ramakrishnan also said the HC judge had miscalculated on the loans and this alone clearly revealed the flaws in the judgment. Similarly, the judge had calculated the construction cost per square feet in 1995 at Rs. 280 which was lower than the Rs. 315 fixed by the PWD then. This also raised doubts.
Moreover, there are doubts over marriage expenses and Namadhu MGR subscriptions. To safeguard the confidence reposed by the public in judiciary, the Karnataka government should go for an appeal in the Supreme Court, he said.
AAP State unit said the deadline created a situation wherein the judge had to deliver the judgment based on “one-sided arguments.” While the value of the assets has been brought down several fold by the HC judge, Public Prosecutor Acharya was not even allowed to argue against such a valuation which resulted in a travesty of justice, the party said in a statement.
