As much back in early 2006, the Supreme Court pulled up Jayalalitha for making a mockery of the judicial process and asked how long could she drag the income tax returns case but nonetheless it is funny that the case has not yet come to close, DMK President Kalaignar said observing, “The world is a drama! Who knows what is happening in Tamil Nadu?”
Just like the disproportionate assets case against her, this case was also pending in courts for more than 15 years. Jayalalitha and Sasikala started a partnership concern ‘Sasi Enterprises in 1990, but failed to file its income tax returns for the years 1991-92 and 1992-93 and also their personal income tax returns for the year 1993-94. Their appeal to IT appellate tribunal was rejected and directed to pay tax. The IT department filed a criminal case against them in 1996 for concealing their income, and the case was pending in the first Judicial Magistrate Court (Economic offences), Egmore for 15 years now.
As the two failed to respond to the summons of the IT department, the department filed a case in the Madras High Court n 2005, which was dismissed. The department appealed to the Supreme Court and it came for hearing before the bench of Justices P.N.Agarwal and A.K.Mathur on 24.2.2006 when the counsel for Jayalalitha pleaded for six weeks time.
The judges observed, “You are making a mockery of the judicial process. How long can you drag the proceedings of the court? By appearing in the trial court and answering questions under Cr PC section 313, you should have set an example to others. What counter could you file in this case? (To her counsel) We want to issue orders today itself that your client should appear in the court and answer questions”. But despite the Supreme Court so categorically telling like this the case has not yet come to a close.
Their appeals to the Madras High Court and the Supreme Court were dismissed and the Supreme Court bench on January 30 ordered them to face the trial and directed the trial court to complete it within four months.
After the Supreme Court directive to complete the case in four months, when the cases came up before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, R. Dakshinamurthy, Economic Offences-I, Egmore on March 20, the Magistrate ordered them to appear before the court on April 3 for filing charges. But on April 3 they didn’t appear and Jayalalitha’s lawyer filed a petition for exempting her as she was in election campaign and Sasikala’s lawyer pleaded that she was suffering from back pain and diabetes. The counsels for IT department stoutly opposed the petitions and the Magistrate directed them to appear on April 10.
On that day (April 10) also they didn’t appear and their lawyer P. Kumar filed a petition pleading for deferring the hearing as they had filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking four more months’ time to complete the case and also an appeal in the Madras High Court against the order of the court for appearance of Jayalalitha was pending. The Magistrate posted the case on April 28. But the High Court did not at all take up their appeal for hearing and they filed the petition in the Supreme Court only on the next day April 11. But strangely the Supreme Court immediately took up their petition for hearing.
Jayalalitha’s counsel argued that she was involved in intensive campaign for Lok Sabha elections and also seriously engaged in government works and hence the case hearing should be postponed by four months and her personal appearance dispensed with.
The counsel of IT department pointed to the January 30 order of the SC and both of them were avoiding appearance in the trial court and hence their petition should be dismissed. But the SC gave three more months’ time.
When the cases came up before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, R. Dakshinamurthy, Economic Offences-I, Egmore on May 19, Jayalalitha and Sasikala did not appear.
In the meanwhile, the Supreme Court extended the time for disposing of the cases in three months from June 6 this year. Counsel submitted that due to the bereavement of the counsel on-record, he would not be in a position to appear in the case till June 1. He requested the court for posting the matter on June 3 for fixing a date for the appearance of the accused. The Special Public Prosecutor for IT cases opposed the adjournment of the case without fixing the date for the appearance of the accused. Dakshinamurthy said that considering the submissions by both the sides, he was adjourning the case to June 3 when he would pass orders on the date of the appearance of the accused and on that day (June 3) he directed the two to appear on June 9.
But, Jayalalitha on June 9 once again skipped the court appearance in an income tax related case. The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offence), which is hearing the case, ordered Jayalalitha and her friend Sasikala to appear before it at the next date of appearing on June 30 and in first week of July without fail.
In its oral observation, the court said Jayalalitha “must” adjust her programme so that she can attend court proceedings.
Jayalalitha, who was supposed to appear before the court on that day, told the court through her lawyer that she had some official duties to discharge and asked the court to give time by June-end. Her friend Sasikala, in a separate petition gave health reasons to excuse her from the appearance from the Court.
It may be noted, the ADMK chief earlier filed a petition seeking exemption from personal appearance in the case. However the Court dismissed the petition and said on April 10th Jayalalitha must appear before the Court. The court had directed Jayalalitha and Sasikala to appear before it for questioning and framing of charges.
When the matter came up for hearing, advocates representing Jayalalitha and Sasikala, requested time to appear before the court, and objecting to it. The Income Tax Department lawyer argued that they can’t keep giving reasons. He also alleged that this is against the Supreme Court’s order.
So, according to the court’s directive Jayalalitha should appear in the court of the ACMM (Economic Offences) on June 30 and she ‘must’ adjust her programme so that she can attend court proceedings on that day without fail.
But it is not Jayalalitha’s wont to respect judiciary and abide by its orders. When she doesn’t give two hoots even for the apex court of the land, who is a magistrate after all, supposed to be under the mercy of the State government, to give directives to her, she must have thought! So she has deliberately announced a programme on June 30, a visit to her constituency Srirangam, for inaugurating projects and schemes! Actually this programme was earlier fixed on June 12 and wide publicity was made in Tiruchi for it. Then without adducing any reason it was postponed and now fixed on June 30, obviously to avoid appearance in the court.
Had this deliberate disobedience to a court’s order been resorted to by any other person howsoever high influential or powerful he/she might be, normally the courts pass orders to the police to take such person into custody and produce him/her before the court. What will the judiciary do now for the deliberate disobedience of court order by Jayalalitha, ask the law-abiding citizens of the nation. r
No comments:
Post a Comment