Former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister late J Jayalalithaa.
Credit: PTI File Photo
New Delhi: One of the legal heir of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Karnataka High Court's order of January 13, 2025, which declined a plea to return the movable and immovable assets, seized by the authorities, in the multi crore disproportionate assets case.
In a special leave petition drafted by advocate M Sathya Kumar, J Deepa stated since the proceedings stood abated in terms of judgment by this court in 2017, Jayalalithaa cannot be treated as a convict resulting in the confiscating of properties seized by the prosecution.
"The properties under seizure are to be returned by lifting the attachment order passed under the Ordinance, 1944," the plea said.
After acquittal order of the high court on May 11, 2015, Jayalalithaa passed away on December 05, 2016 i.e., before the judgment of this court on February 14, 2017.
"In terms of the judgment of this court, all the proceedings against Jayalalithaa stands abated and there is no presumption of guilt based on the conviction and sentence passed by the Special Court," it said.
The plea also stated it is settled principle that with the death of an acquitted person, the appeals against acquittal should abate and there is no question of restoration of conviction, sentence and the fine imposed by the Special Court.
The petitioner stated she is the one of legal heir of Jayalalithaa in terms of judgment of the Madras High Court of May 27, 2020, along with her brother.
The petitioner challenged the high court's judgment of January 13, 2025 and the Special Court's order of January 29, 2025, directing the authorities to hand over of the properties to the state of Tamil Nadu.
The high court, in its order, had noted that the apex court had set aside the acquittal order passed by the Karnataka High Court with a clear finding that the order of confiscation and other directions has to be adhered to by all concerned, including the legal representatives of deceased.
The high court had also said that further interpretation of the apex court in the appeal proceedings is impermissible since the top court said that the trial court order is restored in full including consequential directions, even though Jayalalithaa died during the pendency of the appeal.