M A I N   N E W S

SC rejects Jaya’s plea on stay
Her appointment as CM at stake

New Delhi, September 4
Refusing to vacate the stay on the Madras High Court hearing appeals of J. Jayalalithaa, the Supreme Court today declined to adjourn proceedings before its five-judge Constitution Bench where her appointment as Chief Minister despite conviction has been challenged.

The five-judge Bench headed by Mr Justice S. P. Bharucha decided to go ahead with the hearing of six petitions challenging Jayalalithaa’s appointment rejecting a plea by her counsel K.K. Venugopal, who said the high court should be allowed to go ahead with the three appeals she had filed challenging her conviction in these cases.

Mr Justice Bharucha said her application seeking the vacation of the stay along with the petition filed by special prosecutor K. V. Venkatapathy, who has sought transfer of the appeals from the Madras High Court to another high court, will be heard on Friday.

During the hearing of the six petitions, the bench comprising Justice Bharucha, Justice G.B. Pattanaik, Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, Justice Ruma Pal and Justice Brijesh Kumar took strong exception to numerous telegrams received by the court purportedly sent by members of Madras Bar Association calling Venkatapathy a “liar”.

“This is not done. I expect this to stop immediately as this is absurd,” Mr Justice Bharucha remarked, making Mr Venugopal observe that this was “stupid” on the part of the senders.

Racing against the November 13 deadline for being elected to the state Assembly to continue as Chief Minister, Ms Jayalalithaa yesterday filed an application in the Supreme Court seeking the vacation of the stay restraining the Madras High Court from hearing appeals challenging her conviction in the Tansi land scam and hotel cases.

Right at the beginning of the hearing, counsel for the Tamil Nadu Government P.P. Rao raised several preliminary objections including that the petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution had failed to mention as to which fundamental right of the petitioners had been affected by continuance of Jayalalithaa as the Chief Minister.

However, the Bench said it involved a matter of great constitutional importance and suggested to Mr Rao to raise the objections during his arguments.

Opening the arguments for petitioner B. R. Kapoor, Former Attorney General Ashok Desai contended that a person who has been appointed as a minister without being a member of the Assembly should have on the date of appointment the requisite qualification to get elected to the House within six months.

Mr Desai said Ms Jayalalithaa was barred by the Election Commission from contesting elections due to her conviction on three counts and hence did not possess the requisite qualification to become a member.

The arguments will continue tomorrow.

During arguments, on the question whether a convicted person be appointed the Chief Minister without her conviction being set aside by higher courts, Attorney General Soli Sorabjee said if this was allowed it would strike at the root of the democratic polity intended to be implemented by the makers of the Constitution.

If there was a substantive disqualification operating against a person to be chosen as the Chief Minister, as was the case of Ms Jayalalithaa due to her convictions in corruption cases, that person could not be appointed to the post, Mr Sorabjee said.

Appearing for Mr Selvaraj, a DMK leader, senior advocate Fali S. Nariman contended that if a Chief Minister was convicted, he had to be disqualified from membership of the House and his chief ministership goes.

Alternatively, if a person was convicted, he could never be chosen to become the Chief Minister, he said adding “what cannot be done directly, should not be permitted to be done indirectly.”

Appearing for Pradep Chautala and Dhananjay Chauhan, senior advocate Anil Devan wondered whether the constitutional rule of law had become so weak in India that a convicted person could hold the office of Chief Minister.

All three — Sorabjee, Nariman and Devan — contended that if this was so tomorrow a convicted dacoit or a murderer could stretch the interpretation to hold the office of the Prime Minister. PTI