In such a case, the CJI has given the High Court liberty to approach the Supreme Court again for more time.

The Supreme Court on Friday extended the bail granted to former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa and four other accused till the Karnataka High Court disposes off their appeals against conviction in a disproportionate assets case.This means that the High Court will have to wait till a newly-formed three-judge bench of the Supreme Court first gives a final decision on the question whether the entire appeal proceedings held in the past three months was vitiated due to the presence of Special Public Prosecutor Bhavani Singh.The three judge bench was formed by the Supreme Court only on Thursday after a bench of Justices Madan B. Lokur and R. Banumathi delivered a split verdict on DMK leader K. Anbazhagan's plea to remove Mr. Singh.Justice Lokur held Mr. Singh had no authority to appear as prosecutor and the appeal proceedings were vitiated. Justice Lokur held that the appeals have to be heard afresh.But Justice Banumathi had differed, holding that the appeal proceedings were in the right as Mr. Singh did have authority.Now, it is up to the three-judge bench to decide on whether it should agree with Justice Lokur or Justice Banumathi. The hearing on this reference is scheduled to start on April 21, 2015.Hearing the plea by accused persons for extension of bail, a bench led by Chief Justice H.L. Dattu agreed to the Karnataka High Court's plea for more time to dispose the appeals. The bench gave time till May 12, 2015.So, if the three-judge bench agrees with Justice Banumathi that Mr. Singh had authority, the judgment on the appeal, which is already reserved, can be given soon, possibly by May 12.On the other hand, if the three judge bench agrees with Justice Lokur, the entire appeals would have to be re-heard, and this would take another three to four months.In such a case, the CJI has given the High Court liberty to approach the Supreme Court again for more time.Friday's hearing comes after the apex court's extension of bail of Ms. Jayalalithaa and the other three accused in the case -- Sasikala, Ilavarasi and Sudhakaran -- till April 18, 2015.It had paved the way for a speedy hearing of their appeals against conviction in the disproportionate assets case by asking the Karnataka High Court Chief Justice to constitute a Special Bench to "exclusively" hear the case on a day-to-day basis and complete it in three months.Chief Justice Dattu had decided on this "keeping in view the peculiar circumstances" of the case.The Chief Justice had even orally observed that in case the appeal proceedings are not completed in three months, the apex court could be duly informed and an extension of 15 days could be considered.The four accused were granted bail first on October 17 on the condition that their appeal papers are duly filed before the Karnataka High Court by December 18 as a step to ensure there is no delay in appeal process.Ms. Jayalalithaa and the three co-accused guilty of amassing wealth disproportionate to their known sources of income to the tune of Rs. 53 crore during her first term as Tamil Nadu Chief Minister between 1991-96. Ms. Jayalalithaa was sentenced to four years' imprisonment by a special Bengaluru court on September 27. The trial had taken 18 years to conclude.

TWISTS AND TURNS

  • › The charges: Conspiracy: As CM, Jayalalithaa conspired with three others to acquire assets to the tune of Rs. 66.65 crore
  • › Disproportionate Assets: The assets were disproportionate to her known income
  • ›Abetment: The other three abetted the offence by acting as benami owners of 32 private firms
  • › Prosecution's take: Modus operandi was to deposit cash in benami firms’ accounts
  • ›Prosecution's take: The firms gave her address as theirs while opening accounts
  • › Prosecution's take: Ms. Jayalalithaa spent crores of rupees on renovations and constructions, her foster son’s wedding and possessed huge quantity of jewellery.
  • › Counter: Prosecution born and out of malice and vendetta, many illegalities and defects in investigation. She had sufficient income form legal sources. Others were not benamidars.
  • › Counter: No material to show sarees, watches and footwear seized were bought during her tenure.
  • › Counter: Income-Tax authorities and Tribunals have accepted their returns and valuation of assets.

Verdict reserved on Jayalalithaa appeal

"Jayalalithaa approached HC with unclean hands"


Appeal outcome will impact TN politics

Corruption and the courts

Jayalalithaa conviction: What posters say...