Search the Internet           Tips

Jaya appeals against Tansi convictions

Former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalitha Tuesday filed separate appeals in the Madras High Court challenging her convictions by a special court in two Tansi land deal cases, in which she was sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment and two years RI and also sought suspension of the sentences.

In her appeals, the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam supremo contended that the October 9 judgement of the trial judge was incorrect, contrary to law, weight of evidence and the probabilities of the case and prayed that it be set aside.

Stating that the court was wrong in believing the version of the crime branch-CID of the state police and had totally failed to consider legal issues which were in her favour. She said if the court had properly appreciated the case it could have recorded her innocence and acquitted her.

Besides Jayalalitha, Special Judge P Anbazhagan had also convicted her close aide Saiskala Natarajan and four others in both cases, which related to purchase of property belonging to government owned Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation by Jaya Publications and Sasi Enterprises, firms in which the former chief minister and Sasikala were partners, and awarded them similar jail terms.

Others convicted were former Tansi Managing Director T R Srinivasan, former rural industries minister Mohammad Asif, and a special deputy collector (stamps) S Nagarajan and an additional secretary in the former chief minister's office, Karpoorasundara Pandian.

According to the prosecution the state had suffered a loss of about Rs 41.6 million on account of the property having been purchased in 1992 well below the prevailing market rates and the consequent reduction in stamp duty.

Jayalalitha said the prosecution by conceding that charges under Section 420 IPC could not be proved against her had in effect admitted that there was no cheating involved in the case and that the valuation was proper. 'If the valuation is proper, there is no possibility of any offence being made out at all', she contended.

Stating that the trial court's view that no offence had been made out under Sec 169 IPC should have been further read into the other charges, she said the view would automatically rule out the alleged charges of abuse of position, obtaining any gain and breach of trust.

She said the court ought to have seen the effect of acquittal under IPC sections 169 and 420, which befell on other provisions under which she had been charged with. The court while convicting her should have seen that it was doing so without any documentary or oral evidence.

Jayalalitha said the courts reliance on the evidence of former state chief secretary T V Venkataraman, former finance secretary Narayanan and former rural industries secretary Lathika Padalkar, who had all consented to the sale proposal, was unacceptable.

Jayalalitha said the trial court had failed to note that the decision to sell the property was taken in 1985 itself and several attempts in that direction proved to be exercises in futility.

She said the different yardstick adopted by the court in convicting her for three years in one case and two years in the other, especially when the charges were one and the same and the findings of the court were one and the same in both cases was a clear mockery of the judicial system.

Jayalalitha also filed a memo to grant her bail.

The trial judge had suspended implementation of the sentences till November 7 to enable them to appeal to a higher court.

Sasikala had also filed similar petitions challenging her convictions, seeking suspension of sentences and bail.

They had been convicted under IPC sections 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 409 (breach of trust) and the Prevention of Corruption Act. The judge, however, absolved them of charges under sec.169 IPC.

The petitions are likely to come up for hearing on Wednesday.

Tell us what you think of this report