The Karnataka High Court on Monday left it open to both the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam general secretary, K. Anbazhagan, and the Karnataka government to seek clarification from the Supreme Court on the issue of a competent authority to appoint a Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) to represent the prosecution in the appeals filed by AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa and three others questioning their conviction in the disproportionate assets (DA) case.
Also, the High Court said no prejudice would be caused to the case if Bhavani Singh, who was authorised by the Tamil Nadu government to represent the prosecution in the appeals, is allowed to continue in the case till such clarification was sought from the apex court as Mr. Singh was the SPP for the trial in terms of the apex court’s 2003 verdict of transferring the case to Bengaluru from Chennai.
Though the High Court observed that it is Karnataka that should take to the logical end further proceedings in the DA case in view of its transfer to Karnataka, it refused to interpret the apex court’s 2003 verdict to find out whether it is the Tamil Nadu government or the Karnataka government authorised to appoint the SPP to represent the prosecution in the appeals filed by the convicts.
Justice Anand Byrareddy passed the order while disposing of a petition filed by Mr. Anbazhagan, who had contended that Karnataka is the competent authority to appoint SPP, as the apex court had withdrawn the case from Tamil Nadu.
Though the SC had directed Karnataka to appoint a SPP in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court to conduct the trial, Justice Byrareddy said it is not forthcoming from the direction that what should be the procedure required to be adopted, including appointing a SPP to conduct further proceedings like appeals in the DA case after the completion of trial.
The petitioner had questioned the legality of the authorisation given by the Tamil Nadu government to the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption to appoint Mr. Singh as SPP while alleging that Mr. Singh had colluded with the convicts.
