MESSAGE BOARD NEWSLINKS US EDITION COLUMNISTS DIARY SPECIALS INTERVIEWS CAPITAL BUZZ REDIFF POLL DEAR REDIFF ELECTIONS ARCHIVES SEARCH REDIFF
Lok Sabha member C Kuppusamy filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the court praying that the CBI investigation should be monitored by the court under the powers of judicial superintendence vested in it.
The cases are the ones pertaining to purchase of London Hotels, South Asian Federation (SAF) games and the Granite scam, which are now being handled by the state's Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC).
In a simultaneous move, party legislator V Perumal filed a writ petition seeking appointment of PPs by the high court for corruption cases filed against Jayalalitha in special courts.
The petition said after AIADMK's electoral victory, Special PPs handling the cases had resigned and work in the special courts had come to a standstill.
Perumal's petition alleged that appointment of Public Prosecutors by Jayalalitha would not be on objective considerations in consonance with legal provisions. It had become necessary to invoke the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of the high court to set right the constitutional anomaly and to ensure that the law took its course.
Maintaining that Jayalalitha was the prosecutor and the prime accused in the three cases as she was also in charge of the home ministry and the vigilance department, Kuppusamy contended that cardinal principle of natural justice vis-a-vis 'nemo jude in causa sua' (no man can be a judge in his own case) stood violated.
Even though the investigation was complete in the London hotels case, a petition had been filed by the DVAC in the trial court to 'reopen' investigation for which a year's time had been sought, he said.
Alleging that immediately on assuming power the All India Ann Dravida Munnetra Kazhagan (AIADMK) supremo had taken charge of the home ministry only to scuttle the trial and withdraw the cases against her, the petitioner charged that Jayalalitha had also transferred all 'efficient' police officials investigating the cases as 'a punitive measure in the guise of administrative exigency'.
"Over 100 Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and India Police Service (IPS) officers were transferred by Jayalalitha to ensure that the cases pending against her were not investigated effectively," he alleged.
The transfers had created a sense of fear amongst officials that those collecting evidence against Jayalalitha and her coterie would face immediate transfer and other undesirable consequences, Kuppusamy contended.
The 'unprecedented' transfers and the position wherein the prosecutor and the accused were one and the same person led to the conclusion that justice would not be done, he maintained, adding hence that the only remedy was to move the court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
In the hotels purchase case, Jayalalitha and AIADMK MP T T Dinakaran had been charged with investing Rs 439.8 million in two hotels in the United Kingdom.
The 'Granites scam' pertains to the alleged irregularities in leasing out granite quarries, while the 'SAF Games' case relates to granting of advertisement rights for the 1995 SAF Games held in Madras.
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE TO READ The Jayalalitha Jayaram case study Jaya in battle against law, and time Top TN police officials shifted, DMK leader arrested
Tell us what you think of this report
