ASSEMBLY POLL '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ELECTIONS '98
ARCHIVES

Special judges pooh-pooh notification, go ahead with hearings

In a rebuff to the Centre's gazette notification, transferring cases of corruption against AIADMK general secretary J Jayalalitha and others from the three special judges to sessions courts, the special judges today went ahead with the trial proceedings, refusing to take cognisance of the notification.

Special Judge-2 V Radhakrishnan said the notification did not have any legal sanctity or force and it might amount to contempt of court. It had been issued in haste and it was not known whether the high court had been consulted. "The notification is not even worth the paper on which it is printed," he added.

The judge made the remarks while rejecting memoranda filed by Jayalalitha and former state director-general of police K Hariharan, seeking orders for transfer of the pending cases to sessions courts as per the notification when the fire tenders scam case in which the latter was the main accused, came up for hearing.

Special Judge (i) S Sambandham dismissed similar memoranda filed by Jayalalitha and former Union minister Sedapatti R Muthiah when the case relating to the amassment of wealth by the latter to the tune of Rs 4.57 million came up for hearing.

The judges pointed out that the special judges had been appointed on April 30, 1997, as per the draft notification of the Madras high court to try a group of cases and not an area or areas of cases as presumed in the Centre's notification.

The special judges functioned under the superintendence of the high court and the Supreme Court, they pointed out.

Judge Radhakrishnan said the notification had been issued under the presumption that, in the appointment of more than one special judge, the Centre alone had the powers to specify the judges to try a group of cases under Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, while such powers were with regard to a particular area or areas and not for a group of cases bunched as corruption cases.

He pointed out that the notification had been issued despite the Madras high court verdict, upholding the appointment of the three special judges, while dismissing the petitions filed by Jayalalitha and others.

Judge Sambandham said the special judges were to try a group of cases and were not area judges. "We are functioning as per the pleasure of the high court and Supreme Court," he added.

After the judges rejected the memoranda, five witnesses were examined in both the cases.

UNI

Tell us what you think of this report