HC sets aside special judge order attaching properties of Jaya

 

Order not in accordance with procedural law, says judge

 

Chennai:

After nearly 14 years, Madras High Court has set aside the order passed by a special judge attaching 22 properties of Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa and three others in the disproportionate wealth case stating that the order is “not in accordance with procedural law” and is “not sustainable”.

Justice Aruna Jagadeeshan after hearing the petition filed by Jayalalitha and three others said that the impugned order passed by a special judge on July 17, 2000 on attaching the properties is set aside with direction to the special judge in Bangalore for a fresh disposal by directing the prosecution to implead all the 22 firms and companies and dispose of the applications at the first instance by strictly following the procedures contemplated in the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance 1944 and pass order in accordance with law.

The other three appellants in the case are Sasikala, J Ilavarasi and Master Vivek.

The judge observed that the investigation agency has attached certain properties where none of the appellants are either directors or shareholders at any point of time.

“There is every force in the submission made by the counsel for appellants that they are placed in a disadvantage position to explain some of the purchases for the properties not owned by them but owned by third parties or companies,” the judge observed.

The purpose of furnishing the names and addresses of the companies is to afford an occasion to the court to peruse it and issue notices to those companies and calling upon them to appear and make their objections to the attachment of the properties.

“In fact as per an ordinance, the special judge has to issue notice to all persons represented to him as having or being likely to claim any interest or title in the property of the person to whom notice is issued and make their objection to the attachment,” the High Court observed.

“Unless the interested persons are put on notice and without the essential details of those persons there could not be an attachment by way of an Omni Bus order,” the judge said while referring to the 22 property that were attached.

“The special judge while trying an offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act is legally bound to dispose of the applications filed under the ordinance while trying the offence before proceeding to decide the criminal case. As this goes to the root of the matter, justice requires that the decision has to be arrived at by disposing of the crime applications before proceeding to hear the arguments in the main case in order to give fair trial,” the High Court observed