Writ Petition (Criminal) Nos. 154 and 166 of 2013. Case: Selvi J. Jayalalithaa and Ors. Vs State of Karnataka and Ors.. Supreme Court (India)
| Case Number | Writ Petition (Criminal) Nos. 154 and 166 of 2013 |
| Judges | B. S. Chauhan and S. A. Bobde, JJ. |
| Issue | Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 5, 13; General Clauses Act - Section 21; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Sections 234, 301(2), 309, 311, 313, 314; Karnataka Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1977; Karnataka Judicial Services (Recruitment) Rules, 1983 - Rule 3(2); Karnataka Judicial Service (Recruitment) Rules,... |
| Judgement Date | September 30, 2013 |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
Judgment:
B. S. Chauhan, J.
1. The Petitioners have challenged the order dated 10.9.2013 passed by the Government of Karnataka asking Shri G. Bhavani Singh - Respondent No. 4, Special Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as 'SPP') in a pending prosecution against the Petitioners not to appear in the said matter; the communication dated 14.9.2013 passed by the Chief Justice of High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore by which the Chief Justice has approved the removal of Shri G. Bhavani Singh as SPP, as well as the consequential order dated 16.9.2013 issued by the State Government removing the Respondent No. 4 from the post of SPP.
2. A prosecution was launched against the Petitioners for having assets disproportionate to their known income in the year 1996-1997 in the State of Tamil Nadu. Thiru. K. Anbazhagan (Respondent No. 5) is a political rival of the Petitioner No. 1, who is and has been the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu on a number of occasions. The Petitioners approached this Court on 18.11.2003 for transferring the Petitioners' trial to the neighbouring State of Karnataka in the interest of justice, on the ground that a fair trial was not possible in the State of Tamil Nadu. While transferring the matters to the State of Karnataka, this Court for appointment of SPP issued the following directions:
The State of Karnataka in consultation with the Chief Justice of High Court of Karnataka shall appoint a senior lawyer having experience in criminal trials as public prosecutor to conduct these cases. The public prosecutor so appointed shall be entitled to assistance of another lawyer of his choice. The fees and all other expenses of the Public Prosecutor and the Assistant shall be paid by the State of Karnataka who will thereafter be entitled to get the same reimbursed from the State of Tamil Nadu.
(Emphasis added)
3. On 19.2.2005, the Government of Karnataka, after consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court of Karnataka, appointed Shri B.V. Acharya, a former Advocate General, as SPP to conduct the prosecution. On 12.8.2012, Shri Acharya expressed his inability to continue as SPP. The Government of Karnataka accepted his resignation in January, 2013 and discharged him from the case.
4. The Government of Karnataka then initiated the process for appointment of a new SPP and in accordance with the directions of this Court, submitted names of four Advocates to the High Court for consideration by the Chief Justice.
5. The Acting Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court on 29.1.2013 recommended the name of Shri G. Bhavani Singh, Respondent No. 4 for appointment though his name was not submitted by the Government of Karnataka. The Government of Karnataka accepted the same and issued a Notification appointing Shri G. Bhavani Singh as SPP. After issuance of the notification dated 2.2.2013, Shri G. Bhavani Singh started working and 99 defence witnesses were examined and 384 defence exhibits were marked between 28.2.2013 and 29.7.2013. The defence commenced arguments on 2.8.2013 and concluded the same. However, it was on 13.8.2013 that Respondent No. 5 filed an application Under Section 301(2) Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Special Judge permitted Respondent No. 5 vide order dated 21.8.2013 to file Memo of Arguments and to render such assistance to the SPP as he may require. The Respondent No. 5 filed two applications on 23.8.2013 before the trial court, one Under Section 309 Code of Criminal Procedure seeking adjournment by 4 weeks and another Under Section 311 Code of Criminal Procedure to recall PW. 259, the Investigating Officer (whose examination was over on 24.2.2003) and to examine him as a court witness.
6. On 26.8.2013, the Government of Karnataka issued a Notification withdrawing the appointment of Respondent No. 4 as SPP without assigning any reason and without consulting the Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court.
7. The Petitioners, apprehending delay in the trial approached this Court challenging the removal of Respondent No. 4 as SPP by filing a Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 145 of 2013 under Article 32 of the Constitution of India (hereinafter referred to as the 'Constitution'). This Court issued notice to the Respondents on 30.8.2013. On 6.9.2013, Mr. G.E. Vahanvati, learned Attorney General appeared for the State of Karnataka and informed the court that the Notification dated 26.8.2013 would be withdrawn with a view to consult the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court. In view thereof, the afore-stated writ petition was dismissed as having become infructuous.
8. The State Government withdrew the Notification dated 26.8.2013 vide Notification dated 10.9.2013 and simultaneously, vide letter of the same date, asked Shri G. Bhavani Singh, Respondent No. 4 not to appear in the matter before the Special Judge. The Petitioners then filed the present Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 154 of 2013 challenging the said letter written to the Respondent No. 4 and to direct the learned Special Judge to conclude the trial. On 13.9.2013, this Court issued notice returnable in ten days and stayed the operation of the letter being No. LAW 149 LCE 2012 dated 10.9.2013 passed by Respondent Nos. 1-2.
9. While the afore-stated writ petition was pending in this Court, the Government of Karnataka consulted the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court for withdrawing the appointment of Respondent No. 4 as SPP. The Chief Justice concurred with the view of the State Government, vide communication dated 14.9.2013 and thus, the appointment of Shri G. Bhavani Singh stood withdrawn by the Government of Karnataka vide Notification No. LAW 149 LCE 2012 dated 16.9.2013.
10. Aggrieved, the Petitioners have filed Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 166 of 2013, challenging the said orders dated 14.9.2013 and 16.9.2013.
11. Both petitions have been heard together.
Shri Shekhar Naphade and Shri U.U. Lalit, learned senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submitted that it is settled law that an accused has a right to a speedy trial, as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution; the order withdrawing the appointment of Respondent No. 4 as SPP is a calculated step to protract the trial in view of impending retirement of the learned Special Judge on 30th September, 2013...
To continue reading
Request your trial