With the ruling AIADMK facing a split, the political situation in Tamil Nadu is stuck in a quagmire. Both the factions of the AIADMK have presented their case before Governor Vidyasagar Rao, who is reportedly waiting for the Supreme Court’s verdict on the Disproportionate Assets case in which AIADMK general secretary Sasikala is a co-accused. Here we take a look at the various legal cases Ms. Sasikala faces:
Ms. Sasikala was acquitted by the Karnataka High Court on May 11, 2015 in the disproportionate assets case along with the late Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa, J. Elavarasi and V.N. Sudhakaran. The Karnataka government, however, filed appeals against the acquittal of the accused in the DA case. A Bench of Justices Pinaki Chandra Ghose and Amitava Roy had reserved the appeals for judgment in June last year after 20 days of arguments. The hearing had started on February 23 last. It had sought the responses of Ms. Jayalalithaa and the co-accused before taking a hiatus to study the records of the litigation held over nearly two decades. At one point during the marathon hearings, the Bench had indicated that merely possessing assets disproportionate to the known source of income did not amount to corruption unless the source of income was illegal.
Ms.Sasikala suffered a legal setback just last week when the Madras High Court refused to discharge her from three cases filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in 1995 and 1996 on charges of violating the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) of 1973. The case relates to payments made in US and Singapore dollars to foreign firms for hiring transponders and uplink facilities for J. Jay TV (the predecessor of Jaya TV), which was earlier telecast under the logo of JJ TV. Ms. Sasikala was the chairperson of J. Jaya TV.
Ms.Sasikala will also have to face trial in a case related to acquiring illegal foreign exchange through an acquaintance in Malaysia and using the money to purchase the Kodanad Tea Estate in the Nilgiris, along with her sister-in-law J. Elavarasi. In May 2015, the additional chief metropolitan magistrate in Egmore had discharged her from the case. But on a criminal revision petition filed by the ED, the High Court directed her to face trial.
