The legal team of former Chief Minister and AIADMK leader Jayalalithaa has laid great emphasis on the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal rulings in her favour in her appeal against the conviction ordered by a Special Court in the disproportionate assets case.
In their 185-page written submissions to Karnataka High Court, the defence lawyers have questioned the validity of evidence produced by the prosecution and its acceptance by the trial court.
According to the submissions, which analyse the prosecution’s findings and the trial court’s conclusions under each head of alleged disproportionate asset, the Special Court erroneously depended on a Patna High Court judgment and rejected the findings of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
However, the Patna High Court judgement was overturned by the Supreme Court in a subsequent order, her lawyers Nageshwara Rao and S. Senthil have argued.
For example, with regard to the question of a deposit scheme initiated by party organ ‘Namathu MGR’, the supporting documents of which were dismissed as fudged by the trial court, the lawyers said the Special Judge could traverse beyond the decisions of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal under which the truth and validity and receipt of money under the scheme deposit had been accepted after a full discussion of the evidence.
This argument was used by the team for defending many other transactions as well, including the expenses incurred during the marriage of V.N. Sudhakaran, one of the four accused in the case, in 1995.
Further, the lawyers raised serious doubts about the proficiency of persons included as experts by the prosecution, contending that many of them had no expertise to evaluate the assets. The few who had failed to follow procedures strictly, invalidating their work, they said.
The team also questioned the very admissibility of the case against Ms. Jayalalithaa, as an FIR was registered even without a preliminary enquiry. As in the trial court, the whole case has been dubbed as a conspiracy by political opponents.
Ms. Jayalalithaa and three others were sentenced to four years imprisonment by the trial court in September. The Karnataka High Court reserved its judgement on the appeal on Tuesday.
