The Supreme Court had ruled last year that if a law maker is found guilty of corruption and gets a sentence of more than two years, he or she immediately loses membership of a legislative body. So, conviction and sentencing imply that Jayalalithaa ceases to be a member of the Tamil Nadu legislative Assembly with immediate effect and will not be able to contest elections for the next 10 years (she will not be able to contest polls for six years after completing her jail term).
The other three sentenced on Saturday are Jayalalithaa’s close aides Sasikala Natarajan, Ilavarasi and foster son Sudhakaran. They will have to pay Rs 10 crore each as fine. If any of the convicted persons fails to pay the fine, he or she will have to serve an additional year in jail.
Earlier in the day, Jayalalithaa and the others arrived in Bangalore, where a special court was to pronounce its verdict, in a special flight and were taken for medical examination.
John Michael D’Cunha, the special court judge, read out the 1,300-page judgment, convicting Jayalalithaa under Section 13 (1) (E) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. She was proved to have misused her office and amassed crores of rupees that were disproportionate with her known sources of income.
Soon after the sentence was pronounced, Jayalalithaa and others were taken into judicial custody and sent to a state-run hospital for medical check-up. Special public prosecutor G Bhavani Singh said: “All the four convicted persons, including Jayalalithaa, will be lodged in the central jail here.”
Singh also clarified that a bail application could not be moved in a lower court as the sentence was of more than three years of jail term. Jayalalitha could, however, appeal in either the Karnataka or Tamil Nadu high court for relief from the jail sentence. “The fine will be recovered through sale of property, including jewellery and land seized during the trial,” he added.
According to lawyers, Jayalalithaa is unlikely to get bail anytime soon — at least for a year. Filing an appeal in the high court will take some time.
Disturbances and street protests broke out in Bangalore, as well as several towns and cities of Tamil Nadu, after the court’s decision. The police took nearly 500 persons into custody from outside the Bangalore court and extended the prohibitory orders to up to five km from the special court premises till Saturday midnight.
| QUICK RECALL |
| A timeline of the case 1996
|
ALSO READ: Jayalalithaa convicted: a profile
Tamil Nadu Governor K Rosaiah had to immediately call a meeting of the administration to discuss ways to maintain law and order in the state. Since Jayalalithaa’s party, the All-India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) has a comfortable majority in the Tamil Nadu Assembly, a replacement chief minister will have to be appointed immediately. Several names were in circulation but no confirmation on the next CM had come till the time of going to press.
As many as 60 members of the state Assembly and 18 AIADMK members of Parliament came to Bangalore from Chennai to show solidarity with the chief minister. Besides 20,000 other people were learnt to have arrived in the city from across Tamil Nadu.
The disproportionate-asset case dates back to 1996, when Dravida Munnettra Kazhagam (DMK) General-Secretary K Anbazhagan filed a complaint, claiming Jayalalithaa had amassed Rs 66.65 crore of wealth that was disproportionate with her known sources of income. In a raid carried out in 1997 in connection with this case, 800 kg silver, 28 kg gold, 750 pairs of shoes, 10,500 saris, 91 watches and other items were seized from Jayalalithaa’s Chennai residence.
Later, on a petition filed by Anbazhagan, who expressed his doubt over conduct of a fair trial in Chennai with Jayalalithaa as Tamil Nadu chief minister, the Supreme Court transferred the case to a Bangalore special court in 2003.
Jayalalithaa, who has waged several legal battles and seen several ups and downs in her political career, had to earlier quit as chief minister immediately after taking oath in 2001. This was after the Supreme Court declared her appointment null and void because she had been sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment in a corruption case.
At that time, O Paneerselvam, a junior minister in her Cabinet, was appointed the chief minister of Tamil Nadu. By 2002, she was cleared of all charges and again sworn in as CM.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
)