LAWS(KAR)-2015-5-10

SELVI J. JAYALALITHA Vs. STATE

Decided On May 11, 2015
Selvi J. Jayalalitha Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRL . A. No. 835/2014 is filed under Section 374 (2) of Code of Criminal Procedure by the advocate for the appellant/accused No. 1 praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence both dated: 27.09.2014 passed by the 36th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Court for trial of criminal cases against Kum. J. Jayalalitha and others) at Bangalore in Spl. C.C. No. 208/2004 convicting the appellant/accused No. 1 for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and under Section 120 -B of Indian Penal Code read with Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and the appellant/accused No. 1 is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four years, and to pay a fine of Rs. 100 crores. In default to pay the fine amount, she shall undergo further imprisonment for one year - for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and the appellant/accused No. 1 is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, in default to pay the fine amount, she shall undergo further imprisonment for one month - for the offence punishable under Section 120 -B of Indian Penal Code read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act.

(2.) THE private complaint filed by the complainant -Dr. Subramanian Swamy, President, Janatha Party, No. 1, Papanasam Sivan Salai, Mylapore, Madras -600 004, in Criminal Case No. 3238 of 1996, against Ms. J. Jayalalitha, Former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, 36, Poes Garden, Madras - 600 086, under Section 200 Cr.P.C. alleging offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, reads as under:

(3.) THE complainant states that according to the evidence he has collected from various sources including through Parliament by putting question and getting authoritative answers from the Government, the accused person has committed the offence and is guilty and warrants prosecution.