The proceedings before the Karnataka High Court hearing AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa’s appeal turned out to be a “one-sided affair” as the prosecuting State, Karnataka, was neither a party nor was it heard, said Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) B.V. Acharya.
He pointed out that the apex court itself had declared the appointment of G. Bhavani Singh as SPP by Tamil Nadu illegal and asked the High Court to ignore his submissions.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Supreme Court gave the Karnataka government only a day’s time to file a written statement. “We were denied permission to make oral arguments which were crucial,” Mr. Acharya said. The principles of natural justice were denied to the prosecution during the appeal proceedings.
“I was only ek din ka sultan in the appeal,” he said. Mr. Acharya was appointed SPP for the appeal on April 28, 2015 after the Supreme Court, while declaring Mr. Singh’s appointment illegal, declared on April 27 that Karnataka, not Tamil Nadu, was the sole prosecuting agency.
Mr. Acharya said the prosecution had expected confirmation of the special court’s verdict convicting all the accused.
ADVERTISEMENT
Jaya's Resurrection
The clinching argument
The value of disproportionate assets was Rs. 2.82 crore and this value was not enough to convict them on charges of corruption, said Justice C.R. Kumaraswamy in his verdict while disagreeing with the verdict of the Special Court, which had computed the value of DA at Rs. 53.6 crore.
AIADMK chief keeps her plans under wraps
In a statement, Ms. Jayalalithaa said the verdict gave her immense satisfaction and proved that she was innocent. She warned her political opponents to end their conspiracies against her and thanked the partymen and people who prayed for her. But she did not reveal any of her plans. > Read more
What the SPP said?
“Counsel for the accused were allowed to make oral arguments for nearly two months, but no prosecutor authorised by Karnataka was present during such arguments,” B.V. Acharya said. > Read more
Comment
>Trial, errors and judgment - Sanjay Hegde After a long and convoluted progress through the courts, Ms. Jayalalithaa has finally been acquitted by the High Court. But this might not be the end of the morality play, with another appeal looking likely.
>Amma’s apogee moment - A.R. Venkatachalapathy History, the Marxist cliché goes, repeats itself twice — usually as a tragedy and then as a farce. But sometimes it repeats itself as a bigger tragedy. As the implications of the Karnataka High Court’s blanket acquittal of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa are thrashed threadbare, some crucial cultural questions remain to be explored.
>Where loyalty trumps all - Meera Srinivasan Loyalty, in a sense, has been the hallmark of Tamil Nadu politics. A person’s political commitment is primarily judged, in political circles, by her steely resolve to stick to a leader no matter what he or she is accused of. So what if critics label their leaders corrupt, authoritarian or power-hungry? “None like our leader,” they will vouch, with unmistakable earnestness.
How DA account for less than 10% of total income?
- Vigilance probe’s findings: Construction costs: Rs.27,79,88, 945 Marriage expenses: Rs.6,25,04,222
- High Court’s findings: Construction costs: Rs.5,10,54,060 Marriage expenses: Rs.28,68,000
- Exaggerated value: Construction costs: Rs.2,69,34,885 Marriage expenses: Rs.6,16,36,222
- Total assets: Vigilance estimate - Exaggerated value Rs. 37,59,02,466
- Disproportionate assets: Total assets - Total income
- Rs.37,59,02,466-Rs.34,76,65,654 = Rs.2,82,36,812
- Rs.2,82,36,812 x 100/Rs.34,76,65,654=
The Hindu Editorial
- > A sensational comeback It is an unusual feat for any politician in the country to regain her eligibility to hold the post after being unseated twice as Chief Minister.