NEW DELHI: A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court by one of the legal heir of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa for return of movable and immovable assets, seized by the authorities, in the multi crore disproportionate assets case.
A special leave petition drafted by advocate M Sathya Kumar on behalf J Deepa challenged validity of the Karnataka High Court's order of January 13, 2025, which declined her plea.
Her petition contended since the proceedings in the criminal case stood abated in terms of judgment by this court in 2017, Jayalalitha cannot be treated as a convict resulting in the confiscation of properties seized by the prosecution.
"The properties under seizure are to be returned by lifting the attachment order," the plea said.
After acquittal order of High Court on May 11, 2015, Jayalalitha passed away on December 05, 2016 i.e., before the judgment of this court on February 14, 2017.
"In terms of the judgment of this court, all the proceedings against Jayalalitha stands abated and there is no presumption of guilt based on the conviction and sentence passed by the Special Court," it said.
The plea also stated it is settled principle that with the death of an acquitted person, the appeals against acquittal shall abate and there is no question of restoration of conviction, sentence and the fine imposed by the Special Court.
The petitioner stated she is the one of legal heir of Jayalalitha in terms of judgment of the Madras High Court of May 27, 2020, along with her brother.
The petitioner also challenged the High Court's judgment of January 13, 2025 and the Special Court's order of January 29, 2025, directing hand over of the properties to the state of Tamil Nadu.
The High Court, in its order, had noted that the apex court had set aside the acquittal order passed by the Karnataka High Court with a clear finding that the order of confiscation and other directions has to be adhered to by all concerned, including the legal representatives of deceased.
The High Court had also said that further interpretation of the apex court's judgment in the appeal proceedings is impermissible since the top court had said that the trial court order is restored in full including consequential directions, even though Jayalalithaa died during the pendency of the appeal.
The plea contended that the High Court has erroneously discharged the prosecution from the onus of segregation of assets which was seized by the prosecution before the check period and during check period assets. “The Prosecution having got all the data and relevant documents pertaining to the period in question, it is the appropriate authority to segregate the assets based on the check period. The burden of proving that an asset was acquired before the check period cannot be shifted to the petitioner," the plea said.
