It would be difficult for SC to overturn the HC order in the wake of its own stand on graft involving politicians
Deevakar Anand | October 8, 2014 | New Delhi
October 7 was a day of high drama outside the Karnataka high court that denied bail to former Tamil Nadu chief minister J Jayalalithaa. Dramatic scenes were enacted – women wailing and men rolling on the road – as the news came out of the courtroom. It is, however, highly unlikely that the AIADMK supremo will get a relief anytime soon.
After the high court refused her bail in the Rs 66.65 crore disproportionate assets case, she is left with no choice but to file an appeal in the supreme court.
However, considering that the HC judge A V Chandrashekhar, while denying the bail to Jayalalithaa heavily relied on the supreme court’s earlier orders and observations in similar corruption cases involving ‘heavy-weight’ politicians, her appeal is likely to fall on a sticky wicket in the apex court.
Justice Chandrashekhar said the SC had in the past called “corruption a violation of human rights’’ adding that acts of corruption led to “economic imbalance” and so Jayalalithaa’s case was not fit for bail.
When the AIADMK leader’s lawyer Ram Jethmalani tried to reason in the court that even Lalu Yadav had been granted bail after being convicted in the fodder scam, the judge smirked that even Yadav had had to stay in jail for two years.
The Karnataka HC cited the supreme court order in the State of Maharashtra through CBI, Anti Corruption Branch, Mumbai Vs. Balakrishna Dattatrya Kumbhar case where it stated that “corruption is a serious malady affecting the health of the polity”.
Under the public and media glare, the apex court, legal experts believe, will be highly careful passing an order on Jayalalithaa’s appeal, especially since the high court order was based on benchmarks set by itself.
Justice Chandrashekhar didn’t pay heed to Jethmalani, who said special judge John Michael Cunha, by awarding the four-year sentence to Jayalalithaa had “reversed the first principles of justice” by putting the onus on the accused to prove herself innocent.
Justice Chandrashekhar has, in delivering the bold order, upheld the apex court’s strict posturing on graft cases involving law makers.
In March, the SC had said trial courts should announce their final orders within a year in cases of graft and other serious crimes involving political leaders.
Health groups have expressed their disappointment with a February 12 order of the supreme court, refusing to review or recall an earlier order disposing off a case against the mala fide suspension of the vaccine public sector units (PSUs) and government’s tendency to pamper private sector with public
The Punjab National Bank`s fraudulent transactions worth Rs 11,300 crore should act as a strong trigger for the government for reducing its stake to less than 50 percent in the banks which should then be allowed to work on the lines of private sector lenders with a full sense of accountability to their sha
Budget 2018, forecast to be a “please all” budget, has come out as a “disappoint all” budget. The public is looking askance at a budget that gives with one hand but takes away with both, the Sensex has gone into a tailspin and the pink papers are issuing dire warnings.
Should public sector banks be privatised?
Billionaire jeweller Nirav Modi, whose properties are being searched after Punjab National Bank reported a massive fraud of Rs 11,000 crore, is a good reason why banking reforms
“Gender based discrimination is worldwide and not alone in India. Offences against women are much more severe in cases of international trafficking, forced prostitution and pornography, women including migrant and refugee women face double barriers on virtue of their gender,"said Dr Rashmi M Oza