J Jayalalithaa denied bail by HC, cites apex court rulings on graft

Although Special Public Prosecutor Bhavani Singh said he had no objections to bail being granted, the High Court bench referred to recent Supreme Court orders in corruption cases and ruled against Jayalalithaa’s plea. Initially, after Singh’s turnaround, word trickled out of the courtroom that Jayalalithaa had been granted bail, leading to celebrations by AIADMK supporters who had gathered outside.

“In view of the clear observation of the apex court that corruption is a violation of human rights, this is not a fit case for suspension and bail. Bail plea is liable to be dismissed,’’ said the court. It observed that there were no grounds to suspend her sentence. Though it is true that the sentence can be suspended in cases where it is seven years or less, it is not an absolute right, the court said.

The apex court has created a framework for addressing corruption cases in the course of 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,’’ the bench observed.

The judge said Jayalalithaa’s case was not one without evidence, although there could be reason for argument on evidence that could be taken up at the stage of an appeal. The court cited a Supreme Court observation that conviction after a trial means a person is assumed to be corrupt till exonerated by a higher court.

A conviction by a sessions court is a disqualification against suspension of sentence since the court has applied its mind in the course of the trial, the bench said. The mere fact that the accused was on bail in the course of the 13-year trial of the case and did not violate bail conditions does not warrant a suspension of sentence and grant of bail, it said.

Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, counsel for Jayalalithaa, said the special judge had committed several perversions in the trial and had proceeded in the case with the assumption that the prosecution had proved its case.

Senior advocate Amit Desai, appearing for V K Sasikala, said the special judge had “virtually reversed the first principles of jurisprudence’’ by putting the onus on the accused to disprove the evidence against them rather than on the prosecution to prove its case.

Singh, who had earlier filed written objections to the suspension of the sentence, on Tuesday said he had no objections to the court granting conditional bail to Jayalalithaa. “The SPP after vehemently opposing suspension of sentence and conviction in his written objection has ultimately said he has no objections to granting of bail,’’ the court observed.

Jayalalithaa was given a four-year prison term, along with three of her associates, in connection with a Rs 66.65 crore disproportionate assets case. The court found her guilty of amassing wealth to the tune of Rs 53.60 crore against a known income of Rs 9.91 crore during her first term as Tamil Nadu Chief Minister in 1991-96.

The case, registered in 1997, was transferred to Karnataka by the Supreme Court in 2003 following allegations by the DMK that the trial was being subverted by Jayalalithaa during her second term in power between 2001-2006.