How Subramanian Swamy won the Chennai Grand-slam?

The game of Tennis is a pretty fascinating one, with each side trying its best to indulge in a wide variety of forehand and backhand shots like Volley, Half-Volley, Smash, Topspin etc to dominate on his opponents in the quickest manner possible.

The Subramanian Swamy vs Jayalalitha Sasikala case also followed the same pattern where each side tried its best to tilt the game in their favour using all the legal tools they had in hand. So let’s see how this game of Tennis started in 1996 and followed a long course of 21 years to finally end on 14 February 2017 with Mr. Subramanian Swamy holding the Grand Slam trophy of 4 years jail term for Sasikala along with the seizure of Jaya’s assets, eventually ending her dream of occupying the CM office.

So let’s wind our clocks back to 1996 and see how this Grand Slam match started:-

15-Love:- On 14th June 1996, a complaint was filed against Jayalalithaa by then Janta party chief Mr. Subramanian Swamy in disproportionate assets case.

The main points raised in the complaint was the accumulation of properties worth nearly 66.65 crore between 1991-96 her first term as chief minister, when she herself had declared in 1990 that the total value of her wealth was ‘Nil’ and she would just take a token salary of Re.1 per month.

The complaint was filed under section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against J Jayalalithaa which made the Principal Sessions Judge order an investigation into the matter. The court ordered Letika Saran, 1976 batch IPS officer and the Director General of Police to probe deep into the matter, collect all the necessary pieces of evidence and submit the report within a span of two months to the court.

Both Jayalalitha and Sasikala tried to put a stay on the court order, but the efforts went in vain with the High Court ordering the Anti-corruption bureau to investigate the matter and the successive raids on Jayalalithaa’s house found prima facie evidence in the matter.

30-Love: -Jayalalitha was arrested on December 21, 1996. Disproportionate assets was the main case along with many other allegations on her. During the raid by Anti-corruption bureau more than 10,000 sarees, 750 pairs of shoes, 91 watches and 28kg Gold was recovered from her. The charge sheet was filed on June 4, 1997 under section 120 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

30-15: -The AIADMK came to power in 2001, but she was disqualified from CM post within few months forcing placeholder CM O.Paneerselvam to take the office. Six months after her release, she came back to hold the chair again.

40-15: In 2003, the case was transferred from Tamil Nadu to Karnataka stating the fact that a fair trial is not possible with Jayalalithaa as the head of state. From 2003-2014 the case followed the usual course as it does in the case of the rich and powerful in India. The case was delayed but in September 2014 when the special court verdict convicted Jaya and her 3 aides including Sasikala. They were transferred to Parappana central jail in Bangalore

40-30: -Prison didn’t last long for Jayalalithaa as she was released on bail within 21 days after her arrest. Again the same dilly-dallying courtroom drama continued. Karnataka High Court acquitted Jaya and his 3 aides including Sasikala of all corruption cases. She returned to hold the office as the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu capitalizing the loopholes of our legal system.

Game Over: -Finally in July 2015 Supreme court challenged Karnataka high court’s verdict ensuring the acquittal of Jaya and her aides. Subramanian Swamy pursued the case in the highest court of the country and in June 2016 Supreme court reserved the verdict on the ‘Disproportionate assets’ case. The proceedings continued and in the meantime, Amma died on December 2016.

Finally, after 21 years of long fight, the court gave the landmark judgment on Valentine’s day this year which sentenced Chinamma Sasikala and her aides to 4 years in prison. While Jayalalithaa is no more, the court ordered the seizure of Amma’s assets to recover the Rs. 100 Cr fine.