Court in the Jayalalithaa disproportionate assets case and “restored in full” DA case verdict shows that the corrupt cannot escape from law. The Supreme Court verdict in the disproportionate assets case should The DVAC, thanks to former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa’s hostility, was. SC verdict accuses Jayalalithaa as a mastermind who misused her public Highlighting that the Jayalalithaa disporportionate assets case.
|Published (Last):||22 November 2010|
|PDF File Size:||2.2 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.35 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Printable version Jan 1, 3: Anbazhagan files written submission with Karnataka HC seeking confirming Jayalalithaa’s sentence. Jayalalithaa was also sentenced to four years imprisonment and a fine of Rs.
A special court in Bengaluru had on 27 September convicted Jayalalithaa, Jayallaithaa. In his reply, senior advocate Harin Raval for Jayalalithaa questioned Karnataka’s locus standi to file an appeal against the High Court judgment setting aside the attachment of the companies’ assets.
The court concluded that these shell entities were mere extensions of Namadhu MGR and Jaya Publications and they owed their existence to Jayalalithaa and Sasikala. Secondly, a number of private firms were created, many of which did no other business activity except the purchase of property.
The abatement of charges however does not rub off the smear of ignominy the Supreme Court piled on Jayalalithaa’s political legacy in its page judgment. Prosecution launched in sessions court in Chennai against Jayalalithaa and three others for having assets ‘disproportionate’ to their known income. Sixthly, the manner in which money moved between various accounts suggested that it was being laundered with full knowledge, says the judgement.
Sunday 30 December Now share the story Too bad.
However, it required enormous guts to launch raids at appropriate and the most unlikely of places, pick up valuable evidence, and preserve it assiduously for a clinical analysis. It accused Jayalalithaa as a mastermind who misused her public office, who “masked banking exchanges”, who acquired “vast tracts of land” for pittances and conspired with her co-accused at Poes Garden only to later “feign ignorance” about any crime committed. On the other hand, the Supreme Court held that Justice C.
During Junethe Supreme Court ordered resumption of trial and dismissed the plea from Jayalalithaa seeking to abate the case. What will it mean for Sasikala?
DA Case: Sasikala And Others Guilty, SC Restores Trial Court Verdict [Read Judgment]
I was deeply disappointed, and was worried that all my efforts had been wasted by the most irrational judicial order by the single Karnataka judge, with its strange arithmetic. A source working closely with the Karnataka prosecution said that if Sasikala is sworn in before the verdict, then Karnataka will tell the court that it was always her ambition to be in public service, and all her actions prior to that should be seen in that light. Jayalalithaa came back to power as chief minister again in Kumaraswamy in the Karnataka High Court did not even bother to “appraise the evidence available” and stuck to whatever the income tax authorities found in favour of the accused persons.
What is Jayalalithaa-Sasikala DA Case? This is How It Happened
Jayalalitha, the court says, the circumstances in which Jayalalithaa issued a General Power of Attorney in favour of Sasikala relating to Jaya Publications, showed that she wished to make herself secure from the funds moving through the company.
Judgement was delayed because Anbazhagan petitioned the Supreme Court against the appointment of Bhavani Singh as prosecutor. Simultaneously judgeemnt should be enough pressure on governments in States to free the Vigilance Directorates of their current shackles.
Allows Anbazhagan and Karnataka to file written submissions in HC. Acharya expresses his inability to continue as SPP. Countdown To Elections Results.
Awards four years’ prison term to Jayalalithaa, slaps Rs crore fine. In that situation, Sasikala’s lawyer can ask for the appeals to be heard all over again. The Court stated that the evidence led to the conclusion that the accused A1-A4 Jayalalithaa, Sasikala, Sudhakaran and Ilavarasi had entered into a conspiracy, and Jayalalithaa had amassed assets disproportionate to her income which she had dispersed among the others.
In Maythe Karnataka High Court axsets the trial court’s verdict, acquitting those accused of all charges. Read full judgment and operative parts here. Without this facility in law, many of our VIP offenders would go scot-free.
She was initially convicted for misusing her office during her tenure of — News States Tamil Nadu.