K'taka govt moves SC against Jaya's acquittal in DA case

Karnataka government today challenged in Supreme Court the state High Court's verdict acquitting J Jayalalithaa in a disproportionate assets case that cleared the decks for the AIADMK supremo to return as the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister.
The appeal against the May 11 verdict also soughts setting aside of the acquittal of Jayalalithaa's close aide Sasikala and two of her relatives, V N Sudhakaran and Elavarasi, on the grounds that Karnataka's prosecuting agency was not made a party by them before the High court.
The petition, filed through advocate Joseph Aristotle, claimed that the High Court erred in computing the disproportionate assets of the AIADMK leader.

"The judge committed a grave mistake in totalling the ten items of loan by arriving at a figure of Rs 24.17 crore when, actually on proper totalling, the same ought to be Rs 10.67 crore, resulting in erroneous decision that disproportionate assets is only to the extent of 8.12 per cent of the income when actually it works out to 76.7 per cent, the disproportionate assets being Rs 16.32 crore and the income as found being Rs 21.26 crore," the plea said.
The state government in the petition asked as to whether the High Court had "erred in law" by according the benefit of doubt to Jayalalithaa in pursuance of a Supreme Court judgement holding that an accused can be acquitted if his or her disproportionate assets was to the extent of ten per cent.

It also claimed that the High Court has erred in law in over-ruling the preliminary objections raised by the state government and added that the accused had filed their appeals against conviction without impleading Karnataka as a party.
The plea also referred to a recent Supreme Court judgement holding that Tamil Nadu government had no right to appoint advocate Bhawani Singh as special public prosecutor (SPP) to appear in Karnataka High Court.
State government has sought a stay on the High Court verdict saying that Jayalalithaa "was holding position of Chief Minister of the state at the time of the commission of the offences. The charges are grave. The order of acquittal has resulted in gross miscarriage of justice".