'Abatement of proceedings does not mean acquittal': Supreme Court dismisses plea for release of Jayalalithaa's assets

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea filed by one of the legal heir of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa for release of her assets obtained in breach of the check period in the disproportionate assets case.

A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma said abatement of the proceedings before this court due to her death does not mean that she has been acquitted in the case.

Advocate M Sathya Kumar, appearing for petitioner J Deepa, insisted gold and silver items earned by Jayalalithaa during her acting career and those gifted by her mother must be returned back. He said those properties were acquired beyond the check period.

"We don't know, how would you identify which items were acquired in breach of check period," the bench said.

The court, however, pointed the previous judgment in her case restored the trial court's judgment in toto and proceedings got abated due to her death only.

"Having regard to the observations of this court in the (2017) judgment in the 'State of Karnataka Vs J Jayalalithaa' to the effect that the proceedings before this court stood abated as she has died in the meanwhile, it should imply that further consideration of the case with regard to the correctness of the judgment of the High Court, acquitting the accused number 1 would not be taken further by this court. However, abatement would not imply that the judgment of the High Court has attained finality," the bench said.

Finding no merit, the court dismissed the petition, which challenged the Karnataka High Court's order of January 13, 2025.

The high court had declined the plea to return the movable and immovable assets seized by the authorities, out of the check period in the multi crore disproportionate assets case.

The plea claimed 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," 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.

"As 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 one of legal heirs 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.