Such is the convoluted path of Tamil Nadu politics that Acting Chief Minister O Panneerselvam on Tuesday celebrated a Supreme Court verdict that effectively held his predecessor and mentor, J Jayalalithaa, guilty of corruption.
If fissures had not emerged within the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam since Jayalalithaa’s death in December, Tuedsday would have gone very differently. The Supreme Court delivered a much-awaited order, upholding the verdict of a trial court which found Jayalalithaa and current AIADMK general secretary VK Sasikala guilty of amassing illegal wealth. The order served as vindication for Panneerselvam, who is currently caught in a battle to be seen as the true successor to Jayalalithaa, fondly known as Amma to her supporters .
But Panneerselvam will have to be careful about showing too much triumphalism over the judgment, since it also clearly holds Jayalalithaa guilty of corruption – without actually taking forward proceedings against her, since she died before the verdict could be delivered.
Officially, the appeal against Jayalalithaa’s acquittal by the Karnatka High Court in 2015 stands abated, because she died. But the judgment minces no words about her involvement in the corruption which, it held, was proven. In the quote below, A1 refers to Jayalalithaa, A2 to Sasikala, and A3 and A4 respectively to Jayalalithaa’s foster son VN Sudhakaran and Sasikala’s sister-in-law J Ilavarasi, who were co-accused in the disproportionate assets case.
“We have analyzed the evidence adduced by the parties and we come to the conclusion that A1 to A4 have entered into a conspiracy and in furtherance of the same, A1 who was a public servant at the relevant time had come into possession of assets disproportionate to the known sources of her income during the check period and had got the same dispersed in the names of A2 to A4 and the firms & companies involved to hold these on her behalf with a masked front. Furthermore, the charge of abetment laid against A2 to A4 in the commission of the offence by A1 also stands proved.”
Or in other words, Jayalalithaa was guilty of conspiring to amass illegal wealth which she tried to mask by dispersing to Sasikala, Sudhakaran and Natarajan – making them guilty of abetting her crime.
The 21-year-old case saw Jayalalithaa accused of colluding with Sasikala and the others, putting together illegal wealth of around Rs 65 crore which investigation agencies had found disproportionate to their known sources of income. Some of the properties under the scanner in the case include Jayalalithaa’s Kodanad estate and her Poes Garden residence, which Sasikala still lives in.
Among the various arguments put forth by Jayalalithaa and the other accused was that the court had over-estimated the value of the assets and that Amma herself had no awareness of what the others were doing. While considering this, the trial court had noted that all of the accused were living together at Jayalalithaa’s Poes Garden residence and that the then-chief minister had given power of attorney to Sasikala, making her culpable for all actions even if she was not aware of them.
The Supreme Court’s judgment upholds this view and adds that the movement of money from Jayalalithaa’s accounts to those of the other accused leave no doubt about her involvement.
“The unimpeded, frequent and spontaneous inflow of funds from the account of A1 to those of the other co-accused and the firms/companies involved, overwhelmingly demonstrate the collective culpable involvement of the respondents in the transactions in the face of their overall orientations so as to render the same to be masked banking exchanges though involving several accounts but mostly of the same bank. No other view is possible.”
Sasikala and the other accused were hoping one legal technicality might also help them avoid conviction. The Prevention of Corruption Act technically only applies to public servants, and any others who may assist them in illegal acts. With Jayalalithaa, the only public servant accused in this case, dead, the others were hoping the charges against them also would stand abated.
The court settled this issue. It said that the appeal against Jayalalithaa’s acquittal by the Karnataka High Court stood abated. But it otherwise set aside the entire High Court judgment, and upheld the entire trial court verdict against the other accused – including the sentencing, which means sending them to jail for four years.
“Though in the process of scrutiny of the facts and the law involved and the inextricable nexus of A1 with A2 to A4, reference to her role as well as the evidence pertaining to her had been made, she having expired meanwhile, the appeals, so far as those relate to her stand abated. Nevertheless, to reiterate, having regard to the fact that the charge framed against A2 to A4 is proved, the conviction and sentence recorded against them by the Trial Court is restored in full including the consequential directions.”
