Chennai, April 7: Arguments in the appeal filed by Karnataka challenging the acquittal of Tamil Nadu chief minister, J Jayalalithaa continued today before the Supreme Court.
Arguing on behalf of Jayalalithaa, senior counsel L Nageshwar Rao told the Bench there is no law in Tamil Nadu that bars party cadres from giving gifts to leaders.
This point was made before a bench comprising Justices, P C Ghose and Amitava Roy. It may be recalled Karnataka had argued that that the gifts should be part of the disproportionate income.
Karnataka had also contended that it was a bad precedent when cadres give expensive gifts to political leaders.
No law against gifts:
Rao argued that in Tamil Nadu there is no law that bars party cadres from giving gifts to political leaders. All the gifts given to her are lawful and the prosecution was wrong in contending that it becomes part of illegal or disproportionate income, Rao also submitted.
He further stated that his client was unnecessarily being harassed and framed over this issue. When there is no law that bars it, then how can it be raised by the prosecution, the defence counsel also contended.
To the argument by Karnataka that Jayalalithaa had falsely stated that Namathu MGR a magazine was getting money through subscriptions, Rao countered the same. Karnataka had contended that she had stated that part of the income had been generated through subscription from the paper.
Rao argued that the magazine was getting subscriptions. The income tax tribunal had accepted this fact and even placed the same on record. However the trial court which convicted her chose to ignore this. To say that no money was generated out of Namathu MGR is wrong, Rao further argued.
On the wedding expenses of Sudhakaran, Rao said that it was not right to say that Jayalalithaa alone bore the expenses. Two persons have already stated before the court that they had borne the expenses for the wedding.
The amount mentioned as the expense by the two persons was Rs 97 lakh, Rao also argued. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Jayalalithaa alone had borne the marriage expenses it was further contended by the defence counsel.
The matter has been adjourned to April 19.