Prosecution case “seriously prejudiced”, SPP

The state of Karnataka and SPP appointed by it was denied an opportunity to convince High Court through oral arguments, he says.

May 11, 2015 05:30 pm | Updated July 21, 2016 05:20 pm IST - Bengaluru

Bangalore:02/02/2012:   Advocate General B.V. Acharya at a function on 02, February, 2012.  Photo:V Sreenivasa Murthy

Bangalore:02/02/2012: Advocate General B.V. Acharya at a function on 02, February, 2012. Photo:V Sreenivasa Murthy

Special Public Prosecutor B.V. Acharya on Monday said the prosecution case had been “seriously prejudiced” in the disproportionate assets case against former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa and three others, as the state of Karnataka and SPP appointed by it was denied an opportunity to convince High Court through oral arguments.

Mr. Acharya said he was appointed as SPP after the Supreme Court order which said that appointed Public Prosecutor can file written submission within one day and there was no chance for oral arguments. “So High Court judge could not give me an opportunity.”

“...the total effect is that the state of Karnataka and the Public Prosecutor appointed by it was denied an opportunity to convince High Court judge through oral arguments. This has seriously prejudiced the case of the prosecution,” he told reporters after the High Court acquitted Ms. Jayalalithaa and three others.

Mr. Acharya returned as SPP in the DA case after the Supreme Court on April 27 held as “bad in law” the appointment of Bhawani Singh.

A former Advocate General who had earlier resigned as SPP, he had filed a written submission before the High Court, seeking dismissal of appeals filed by Ms. Jayalalithaa and three others.

Mr. Acharya said State of Karnataka was the sole prosecuting agency as the Supreme Court said but it had been denied adequate opportunity before the High Court.

“While on behalf of the accused for about two months appellants lawyers have made their arguments before the court and during that time there was no Public Prosecutor in place appointed by Karnataka government. So the entire proceedings have gone on without a validly appointed Public Prosecutor.”

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.