Friday, Jun 10, 2005
Friday, Jun 10, 2005 |
| Karnataka | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Entertainment |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Karnataka
Staff Reporter
BANGALORE: The Special Court on Thursday posted to June 22 for orders the applications by the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, Jayalalithaa, and the other accused for clubbing the two cases against them — the Rs. 66.65-crore disproportionate wealth case and the London hotels case. While the accused had sought clubbing of the two cases, the prosecution had opposed it. When the court commenced hearing on Thursday, the Special Judge, A.S. Pachhapure, sought clarifications on certain points in the Madras High Court order of January 10, 2002. He also wanted to know the value of the property purchased in the second case.
Options
The Special Public Prosecutor, B.V. Acharya, said the High Court had given only two options to the Special Court — either to club or the cases or try them separately. It had also said the Special Judge could exercise the options after considering whether there had been any progress in the first case. Since the first case had progressed to a certain extent, there was no possibility of clubbing now. He said the High Court had not found anything wrong in registering a second First Information Report (FIR) or on filing a second charge sheet against Ms. Jayalalithaa. It had only found one infirmity — that of the investigating officer filing a second charge sheet in the court of the Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai. The High Court had said the investigating officer should have filed the charge sheet in the designated court, and to rectify this mistake it had transferred the case to the designated court. He said the second case related to the purchase and subsequent sale of hotels in London.
Submissions
Later, in his supplementary summary of objections, Mr. Acharya contended that the Special Court should not consider the contention by the accused that they would file an application in the Madras High Court for a review/modification or clarification of its January 10, 2002 order. He said such applications before High Courts were not maintainable. He said Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr. PC) barred the courts from entertaining any such application. While under the old Cr. PC, the bar applied only to judgments, the new code barred even final orders. The Supreme Court had held that if the High Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr. PC, it would be a final order and, hence, could not be modified or reviewed. In fact, even further directions thereafter had been held to be illegal. He said the argument that the Madras High Court had not decided on any of the issues but relegated them to the designated court was not correct. The High Court, he said, had decided on certain issues and even issued specific directions on the two options — clubbing or otherwise of the cases. He said the repeated claim that the prosecution was politically motivated was without basis and it had been rejected more than once by the Supreme Court.
Counsel's contention
Counsel for Ms. Jayalalithaa said there was no justification for a second charge sheet. He sought clubbing of the two cases and said the registering of a second FIR and charge sheet was wrong and illegal. He also disputed the figures quoted by the prosecution in the second case. He said he would shortly file his written submissions. All the accused, including Ms. Jayalalithaa, filed applications for exemption from personal appearance which were allowed. None of the accused was present in the court.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Entertainment |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2005, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
