The Supreme Court on Monday ruled as bad in law Tamil Nadu's appointment of a special public prosecutor (SPP) in hearing of former chief minister J. Jayalalithaa's appeal by the Karnataka High Court against her conviction and sentencing in a corruption case.
Holding the appointment of G. Bhavani Singh as flawed, a bench of Justice Dipak Misra, Justice R.K. Agrawal and Justice Prafulla C. Pant also said there was no need for fresh hearing in Jayalalithaa's appeal in the disproportionate assets case.
"Though the appointment (of Bhavani Singh) is bad in law, yet there is no justification to direct for de novo hearing of the appeal, regard being had to the duties of the appellate judge, especially in a case pertaining to the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988," the court said.
Pronouncing the judgment, Justice Misra said that "Tamil Nadu had no authority to appoint the a Bhavani Singh as the public prosecutor to argue the appeal" and it was "Karnataka which is the sole prosecuting agency and it was alone authorized to appoint the public prosecutor".
Holding that the appointment of Bhavani Singh as public prosecutor before the trial court did not make him eligible to appear before the high court on behalf of prosecuting agency, the court said: "The appointment of a public prosecutor, as envisaged under section 24(1) CrPC in the high court is different than the appointment of a public prosecutor for the district courts ..."
The "notification appointing (Bhavani Singh) did not enable him to represent the state of Karnataka in appeal (before the high court)", it said.
More From This Section
The apex court verdict came on the plea by DMK leader K. Anbazhagan, challenging the Tamil Nadu government's appointment of Bhavani Singh as the SPP before the high court.
Noting that Anbazhagan had filed written submissions, running into more than 40 pages, before the trial court, the court said: "Therefore, we are inclined to permit him (Anbazhagan) to file a written note of submissions within 90 pages before the learned single judge/appellate judge."
Similarly, the court granted permission to Karnataka to file a written submission within 50 pages, and said these "shall be considered by the learned single judge and the consideration should be manifest in the judgment".
However, written note of submissions, if any, by Bhavani Singh shall not be considered by the judge, it added.
Jayalalithaa has approached the high court, challenging her conviction along with three others in disproportionate assets case by a Bangalore trial court on September 27, 2014.
The Bangalore court has sentenced Jayalalithaa to four years in jail with a fine of Rs.100 crore.
Besides Jayalalithaa, her aides N.Sasikala, V.N. Sudhakaran and J. Elasvarasi were sentenced by the trial court. They too have appealed before the high court.
The matter was heard by the three-judge bench of the Supreme Court following April 17 split verdict by the bench of Justice Madan B. Lokur and Justice R. Banumathi.
While Justice Lokur held that the appointment of Bhavani Singh vitiated the hearing of the appeal before the Karnataka High Court, Justice Banumathi found no legal infirmity in Bhavani Singh's continuation as SPP as he was appointed for the case and his appointment was not revoked by the Karnataka government.
The disproportionate assets case against Jayalalithaa and three others related to the period from 1991-1996 involving Rs.66.65 crore when she became the chief minister of Tamil Nadu for the first time. The case lasted for about 18 years.