<p>The High Court’s special bench on Wednesday reserved order on BJP leader Subramamian Swamy’s request to assist the court in the ongoing hearing of criminal appeals filed by AIADMK supremo J Jayalalitha and her aides against their conviction in the disproportionate assets case. <br /><br /></p>.<p>Appearing before the court as party-in-person, Swamy stated that he was the original complainant in the case and that he must be allowed to assist the court.<br /><br />He said that he was not seeking to implead or appear as a public prosecutor in the case. Justice C R Kumaraswamy asked him if he could produce any documents to prove he was the original complainant. Swamy replied that following his complaint, the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) had taken a suo motu complaint against Jayalalitha and others. <br /><br />According to Swamy, during the hearing of the bail appeal filed by Jayalalitha and her aides before the Supreme Court, it was he who was present in the court and not the Special Public Prosecutor. He expressed his apprehension over the SPP remaining absent during the hearing. He said that the top court had given oral directions to him to approach the Karnataka High Court for permission to assist the latter in the ongoing case. <br /><br />The bench again sought to know if the top court had given any written direction in this regard. Swamy replied that there was an oral direction, to which the bench observed that it was not aware about what had transpired with regard to Swamy’s assistance to the top court. <br /><br />Swamy replied that he had been doing public service for decades and wanted to assist the court under Section 5 (3) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. He expressed apprehension over the way the case had shaped till now and said that he did not want the prosecution to be delayed further. <br /><br />SPP Bhavani Singh said that he had no objection to Swamy’s written submissions, but he could not appear in person. Senior counsel B Kumar, appearing for Jayalalitha, said that Swamy had been one of the prosecution witnesses during the trial and he could not assist the court. <br /><br />He said that he had filed a private complaint but the trial began with a police complaint. There cannot be two prosecutors for the same case as it will create chaos and have contrary arguments, he submitted. The bench said the order would be passed on Thursday. <br /><br />‘Appeal copies not in order’<br /><br />In another appeal against the appointment of Bhavani Singh as the SPP in the case, a division bench of Justices N Kumar and B Veerappa adjourned the hearing after the appeal copies were not found to be in order. The appeal has been posted before a division bench headed by Justice N Kumar after Chief Justice D H Waghela recused from hearing the matter on Tuesday. </p>
<p>The High Court’s special bench on Wednesday reserved order on BJP leader Subramamian Swamy’s request to assist the court in the ongoing hearing of criminal appeals filed by AIADMK supremo J Jayalalitha and her aides against their conviction in the disproportionate assets case. <br /><br /></p>.<p>Appearing before the court as party-in-person, Swamy stated that he was the original complainant in the case and that he must be allowed to assist the court.<br /><br />He said that he was not seeking to implead or appear as a public prosecutor in the case. Justice C R Kumaraswamy asked him if he could produce any documents to prove he was the original complainant. Swamy replied that following his complaint, the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) had taken a suo motu complaint against Jayalalitha and others. <br /><br />According to Swamy, during the hearing of the bail appeal filed by Jayalalitha and her aides before the Supreme Court, it was he who was present in the court and not the Special Public Prosecutor. He expressed his apprehension over the SPP remaining absent during the hearing. He said that the top court had given oral directions to him to approach the Karnataka High Court for permission to assist the latter in the ongoing case. <br /><br />The bench again sought to know if the top court had given any written direction in this regard. Swamy replied that there was an oral direction, to which the bench observed that it was not aware about what had transpired with regard to Swamy’s assistance to the top court. <br /><br />Swamy replied that he had been doing public service for decades and wanted to assist the court under Section 5 (3) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. He expressed apprehension over the way the case had shaped till now and said that he did not want the prosecution to be delayed further. <br /><br />SPP Bhavani Singh said that he had no objection to Swamy’s written submissions, but he could not appear in person. Senior counsel B Kumar, appearing for Jayalalitha, said that Swamy had been one of the prosecution witnesses during the trial and he could not assist the court. <br /><br />He said that he had filed a private complaint but the trial began with a police complaint. There cannot be two prosecutors for the same case as it will create chaos and have contrary arguments, he submitted. The bench said the order would be passed on Thursday. <br /><br />‘Appeal copies not in order’<br /><br />In another appeal against the appointment of Bhavani Singh as the SPP in the case, a division bench of Justices N Kumar and B Veerappa adjourned the hearing after the appeal copies were not found to be in order. The appeal has been posted before a division bench headed by Justice N Kumar after Chief Justice D H Waghela recused from hearing the matter on Tuesday. </p>
