New Delhi, May 30: Any failure to file an appeal in the J Jayalalithaa disproportionate assets case will amount to betrayal of the Supreme Court's trust in the Karnataka judiciary, the Advocate General has told the Karnataka government.
In a detailed opinion given to the Karnataka government which is delaying filing of the appeal, the Advocate General of the state, Professor Ravivarma Kumar has said that if the ends of justice are to be met, then an appeal has to be filed at any cost.
The Karnataka High Court had acquitted Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and three others in the disproportionate assets case. The Karnataka Chief Minister has said that the cabinet will take a decision on the matter.
Don't betray Supreme Court's trust:
The Advocate General of Karnataka says that the government should not betray the trust of the Supreme Court. When the Supreme Court had transferred the case from Tamil to Karnataka it had done so taking into consideration the high reputation that the Karnataka judiciary has, the AG also said.
The Karnataka government must uphold this faith and ensure that an appeal is filed in the Supreme Court challenging the acquittal of the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister. It is not just about the power to file an appeal, but also the bounden duty of the state to move the Supreme Court of India, Professor Kumar also said.
High Court verdict is not sustainable:
While giving his opinion on the verdict of the High Court, the AG said that the order is not sustainable. A conviction had been earned in the trial court, but the same was reversed in the High Court.
The High Court verdict in my opinion is not sustainable and hence it becomes a fit case to file an appeal seeking a conviction, the AG further pointed out.
The AG also advised the state of Karnataka to appoint senior counsel B V Acharya as the Special Public Prosecutor in the case. He said it is Acharya who should argue the matter before the Supreme Court once the appeal is filed. Acharya is well versed with the case and had argued it at length before the trial court before he decided to step down in the final stages of the trial.
He was once again appointed as the SPP when the Supreme Court had directed Karnataka to file its written submissions before the High Court.
No sanction needed:
Three days back the Karnataka law department had sought to know if there was fresh sanction required to file an appeal before the Supreme Court. This opinion was sought as Jayalalithaa had taken over as the Chief Minister and since she is now a constitutional authority whether a sanction to file an appeal was needed.
The law department had also sought to know if the opinion of the Chief Justice was needed before appointing a Special Public Prosecutor in the case.
The AG in his opinion pointed out that no fresh sanction is needed to file an appeal in the Supreme Court. He also said that the opinion of the Chief Justice is not needed to appoint an SPP. Karnataka is the prosecuting state in the case and hence it is the right of the state to appoint the SPP under the Karnataka Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1977.