Jaya case: Karnataka moves SC, terms HC verdict illegal

Bengaluru, June 23: The Karnataka Government has moved the Supreme Court, challenging the acquittal of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa in the disproportionate assets case. In the appeal, the order of the High Court, which acquitted Jayalalithaa and three others, has been termed as illegal.

The appeal was filed after much deliberation and consideration and it was finally the Karnataka cabinet, which took the decision to move the Supreme Court of India. The matter is likely to come up for hearing before a three judge bench in the first week of July.

High Court order illegal:

The Karnataka government has termed the order of the High Court as illegal. Various considerations have been ignored when the High Court delivered the verdict and passed the order of acquittal, the appeal states. The appeal also seeks to disqualify Jayalalithaa from continuing as the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu.

[Read: The curious case of Jaya amma and the troubled judges]

The acquittal before the High Court had given her the right to take over as the CM and also contest the elections.

Further the appeal also emphasizes on the glaring arithmetic errors committed by the High Court while delivering the verdict of acquittal against Jayalalithaa and her aides.

The High Court had erred while calculating the quantum of the disproportionate assets. A calculation error had brought down the quantum to less than 10 percent as a result of which the case resulted in an acquittal.

While the law permits the court to correct clerical and arithmetic errors, it however does permit altering the final result of the verdict.

[Read: Jaya case: Court likely to rectify arithmetic errors]

Karnataka was not a party:

The second line of argument in the appeal is that Karnataka the prosecuting state was not made a party in the appeal. The appeal states that Karnataka was made the prosecuting state by the Supreme Court when the case was transferred from Tamil Nadu.

However, during the course of the hearing in the High Court, Karntaka was neither heard nor made a party. This is a serious defect and an order could not have been passed without hearing the prosecuting state.

[Read: Jayalalithaa case: Court can correct but not change verdict, says senior counsel C V Nagesh]

Making the prosecuting state or agency is a legal mandate. Jayalalithaa's legal team was given two months time to advance arguments, but no prosecutor authorised by Karnataka was present during such arguments.

Karnataka was not given a chance to put forth arguments. Even the Special Public Prosecutor's appointment (Bhavani Singh) was struck down as illegal by the Supreme Court.

OneIndia News