TN cannot appoint SPP: Karnataka HC

“T.N. government had lost all control over the case in 2003 as soon as the Supreme Court transferred it to Karnataka”

The Tamil Nadu Government has no jurisdiction to appoint the prosecutor in the appeal filed by AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa in the wealth case, the Karnataka High Court said on Wednesday.

The High Court of Karnataka on Wednesday declared that the Tamil Nadu government has no jurisdiction to appoint a public prosecutor to represent the prosecution in the appeals filed by AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa and three others questioning their conviction in the disproportionate assets case.

Terming as “non est” the authorisation given by Tamil Nadu’s Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption (DVAC) to G. Bhavani Singh to represent it in the appeals, the court said that the T.N. government had lost all control over the case in 2003 as soon as the Supreme Court transferred it to Karnataka.

The Karnataka government has been in charge of the case since then, the court said.

A Division Bench comprising Justice N. Kumar and Justice B. Veerappa delivered the verdict while refusing to accept the appeal filed by DMK leader K. Anbazhagan..

The apex court had specifically directed the Karnataka government to appoint a public prosecutor to conduct the case, the Bench noted.

SPP to stay

Meanwhile, the Bench said that it can’t direct the Karnataka government to appoint another special public prosecutor (SPP) when the order of appointing G. Bhavani Singh as SPP still exists.

It held that once an SPP is appointed to a particular criminal case under Section 24(8) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the SPP will have a right to appear on behalf of the prosecution before the magistrate, sessions and higher courts in the respective criminal case at the stages of inquiry, trial or appeal without any separate written permission from the respective State.

In Mr. Singh’s case, the Bench said that he continues to be the SPP for the DA case even before the High Court as he was specifically appointed to conduct the case irrespective of the courts.

Mr. Singh’s term as SPP does not end automatically with the conclusion of the trial of the DA case, the Bench said while pointing out that there was no need for the Karnataka government to issue another notification appointing him as SPP.

Karnataka’s choice

However, the Bench made it clear that if the Karnataka government wants to appoint a new SPP then it has to terminate the appointment of Mr. Singh as per the procedure before making the new appointment.

On the allegation by Mr. Anbazhagan that Karnataka has not been made a respondent in the appeal filed by Ms. Jayalalithaa, the Bench said that it is for the Special Bench, which is hearing the appeals against conviction, to decide.