The Karnataka High Court rejected the appeal by J. Deepak and J. Deepa, heirs of J. Jayalalithaa, for the release of seized assets related to her disproportionate assets case. The court upheld the trial court’s confiscation order, stating the heirs must adhere to previous court findings and emphasized the potential of creating a foundation in Jayalalithaa’s honor.
Karnataka: The Karnataka High Court on Monday (Jan 13th) rejected an appeal by J. Deepak and J. Deepa, the legal heirs of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa, seeking the release of assets seized in the disproportionate assets case registered against her in 2004. Justice V. Srishananda dismissed the appeal, stating that the attachment had already culminated in confiscation proceedings.
Background of the Case
The appellants challenged the trial court’s decision dated July 12, 2023, which dismissed their application under Section 452 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). They argued that Jayalalithaa, as Accused No. 1 (A1), was acquitted by the High Court after her conviction in the trial court. Upon her death, the Supreme Court declared the proceedings against her abated. The appellants contended that since Jayalalithaa could no longer be treated as a convict, her property should be restored to them.
They also claimed that the assets seized included those acquired before the check period, and without proper segregation, the confiscation order could not stand.
The prosecution countered by pointing to the Supreme Court’s direction that upheld the trial court’s confiscation order, making it binding on all parties, including Jayalalithaa’s legal heirs.
The High Court referred to the Apex Court’s findings, which upheld the confiscation of Jayalalithaa’s assets, stating:
“The order of confiscation and other directions has to be adhered to by all concerned, including the legal representatives of deceased A1.”
Justice Srishananda highlighted that the trial court dismissed the appellants’ application on merits and recognized their right to act as Jayalalithaa’s legal representatives. However, it was noted that the confiscation order had been restored in its entirety by the Supreme Court.
The court explained that there is a “vast difference between attachment pending trial and the post-trial order of confiscation.” It added that interpreting the Supreme Court’s order in this appeal would be impermissible and against judicial ethics.
The High Court emphasized that the appellants failed to provide specific details about assets acquired by Jayalalithaa before the check period. It stated:
“In the absence of proper pleadings and proof, this court cannot pass any orders stating that the assets seized by the prosecution prior to the check period can be excluded from the confiscation.”
However, the court clarified that the appellants could present such evidence before the trial court in the future, which would be obligated to evaluate it per the law.
After dismissing the appeal, the court orally advised the heirs to consider starting a foundation in Jayalalithaa’s name. It remarked:
“A large number of poor people are there in this society. Make a Jayalalithaa foundation, spend money, make them feel happy.”
The court further observed:
“What has come to you is the gift of God. Be satisfied with what is available. Lots of negative things would be there, and one would not flourish with ill-gotten wealth.”
Case Title: J DEEPA AND Superintendent of Police
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES