SENTHIL KUMAR
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
Monday, May 11, 2015
What gone in favour for Jaya in Karnataka HC?
The Karnataka High Court said that AIADMK
general secretary Jayalalithaa was entitled for acquittal as the
disproportionate assets (DA) held by her was less than 10 per cent of her
income as per the guidelines of the Apex Court for acquitting public servants
based on the quantum of DA possessed by them in the corruption cases.
The Court said that Ms. Jayalalithaa
possessed DA of only Rs.2,82,36,812 while declining to accept the case of the
prosecution that she had DA of RS. 66.65 crore or the DA amount of Rs. 53.6
crore arrived at by the special court.
In his 919-page verdict, Justice C.R.
Kumaraswamy said that "the prosecution has mixed up assets of accused,
firms and companies and also added the cost of construction i.e.,
Rs.27,79,88,945 and marriage expenses at Rs.6,45,04,222/- and valued the assets
at Rs.66,44,73,573."
"If we remove the exaggerated value of
cost of construction and marriage expenses, the assets will work out at
Rs.37,59,02,466. The total income of the accused, firms and companies is
Rs.34,76,65,654. Lack of proportion amount is Rs.2,82,36,812/-. The percentage
of disproportionate assets is 8.12%. It is relatively small," the Court
found on analysing the documents.
From the Apex Court’s verdict in Krishnanand
Agnihotri’s case, the High Court said that when there is disproportionate asset
to the extent of 10%, the accused are entitled for acquittal. Also the High
Court took note of a circular issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh that
disproportionate asset to the extent of 20% can also be considered as a
permissible limit.
Based on Krishnanand Agnihotri’s case and AP
government’s circular, Justice Kumaraswamy concluded that disproportionate
assets of 10% to 20% has been taken as a permissible limit in DA cases while
taking into consideration the inflatory measures.
"In the instant case, the
disproportionate asset is less than 10% and it is within permissible limit.
Therefore, accused are entitled for acquittal. When the principal accused [Ms.
Jayalalithaa] has been acquitted, the other accused, who have played a lesser
role are also entitled for acquittal," Justice Kumaraswamy said.
On Ms. Jayalalithaa’s income, the High Court
said that the trial court has not appreciated the evidence in a proper
perspective. "Though the trial court in its judgment mentioned that the
accused availed loan by the Indian Bank, but it has not considered the same as
income. Therefore, the trial court has erred in not considering the loans as
income…"
In this case, the trial court has ignored the
Income Tax proceedings as minimum evidentiary value, the High Court said.
Jaya's verdict: some important questions
Jayalalithaa and
three other accused were acquitted of all charges in the disproportionate
assets case. Here are some answers on the next possible scenarios post the
verdict:
1. Can she become the
Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu again? What is the procedure?
She can be elected leader of the AIADMK
legislature party now and can be sworn in CM. she will have to enter the
Assembly through an election within the next six months. As of now, the AIADMK
can pass a party resolution agreeing to reinstate her as the Chief Minister of
Tamil Nadu. Then, the current CM O.Paneerselvam has to render his resignation
to the Governor of the State. After the acceptance of his resignation, Ms. Jayalalithaa
can officially take the oath of office.
2. What will happen
to the assets that were attached initially when she was convicted? The office,
the land, the bus?
The attachment of the assets will be lifted.
During the period of the case, the assets were under the court’s custody. They
will be returned to the ‘original owner’ as mentioned in the documents. The
court might have to wait for 60 days to check if anyone has contested against
the judgment.
3. What about the Rs.
100 crores fine that was imposed on her?
With this verdict, her sentence and her fine
amount has been set aside. She does not need to pay the fine amount now.
4. How come one court
finds the accused guilty while the other court acquits? Why two interpretations
of the same evidence?
It is possible that the High Court took note
of legal points in the defence - for example, the income tax department's
acceptance of IT returns prevents further enquiry into the ownership of assets.
Once this question is answered in favour of the accused, the evidence does not
matter.
5. It took 18yrs to
give the initial verdict, while only 6 months for the appeal in high court. If
for argument's sake, let's say the DMK appeals in the apex court. Will we get a
verdict (which might overturn this and send her again to jail) in a short
period of time, say 6 months?
Yes, it is possible that the appeal can be
taken up within months, if one is filed by the Karnataka government.
6. Can anyone appeal
against this judgment?
As the prosecuting State, Karnataka has the
right to appeal in the Supreme Court against the verdict. Senior BJP leader
Subramanian Swamy can also file an appeal against the verdict as he is the
prime appellant. DMK can’t appeal against this judgment. Karnataka Government
is in no mood to appeal the case.
7. Assuming an appeal
is filed against this judgement in Supreme Court, how long it will normally
take to come to the court?
That depends on the Supreme Court alone. In
Jayalalithaa's case, they fixed a deadline for the High Court to finish the
hearing.
8. What will the
position of the Special Public Prosecutor be now?
B.V. Acharya was re-appointed as the SPP of
the case after the Supreme Court gave an order to remove G. Bhavani Singh. Now,
Mr. Acharya will be expected to give an opinion to the Karnataka government on
whether the verdict is appealable. Then, the Karnataka government can file an
appeal, if necessary.
Sunday, May 10, 2015
Times of India - Sport Awards
Times of India –
Sports Awards
|
|
Sports
Person of the year
|
Jitu
Rai (Shooting)
|
Popular
Choice Award
|
Pankaj
Advani (Billiards)
|
Upcoming/Emerging
Player
Award
|
Malaika
Goel (Shooting)
|
Kushbir
Kaur (Athlete)
|
|
Amit
Kumar Dahita (Wrestler)
|
|
Chikkarangappa
(Golf)
|
|
Sanjita
Chanu (Weightlifter)
|
|
Vinesh
Phogat (Wrestler)
|
|
Youth
Icon of the year
|
Saina
Nehwal (Badminton)
|
Popular
Choice Award
|
Sanjitha
Channu (Weightlifter)
|
Best
Hockey Player (Male)
|
Sreejish
|
Best
Hockey Player (Female)
|
Rani
Rampal
|
Best
Cricketer (Male)
|
Virat
Kohli
|
Best
Cricketer (Female)
|
Harmanpreet
Singh
|
Table
Tennis
|
Achantha
Sharath Kamal
|
Athletics
|
Vikas
Gowda
|
Wrestling
|
Yogeshwar
Dutt
|
Golf
|
Anirban
Lahiri
|
Chess
|
Vishwanathan
Anand
|
Tennis
|
Sania
Mirza
|
Boxing
|
Mary
Kom and Sarita Devi
|
Weightlifting
|
Sathish
Sivalingam
|
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Sunday, May 3, 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)