SC Rejects Jayalalithaa's Niece's Plea for Seized Properties 🏛️❌
- MediaFx
- Feb 15
- 2 min read
TL;DR: The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea by J. Deepa, niece of the late Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa, seeking the return of properties confiscated in a disproportionate assets case. The court maintained that the abatement of proceedings due to Jayalalithaa's death doesn't equate to her acquittal, and thus, the seized assets will remain with the government.
Hey folks! Big news from the Supreme Court! 🏛️✨ They've just dismissed a petition by J. Deepa, the niece of our late CM, J. Jayalalithaa. She was hoping to get back the properties that were taken during that old disproportionate assets case. But the court said, "Nope!" 🙅♀️
What's the scoop?
Back in the day, Jayalalithaa was accused of having assets way beyond her known income. 💰🏠 This led to a big legal battle, and some of her properties were seized. After she passed away in 2016, her niece Deepa thought the case dying with Jayalalithaa meant the properties should come back to the family. But the Supreme Court made it clear: just because the case against Jayalalithaa ended with her death doesn't mean she was cleared of the charges. So, the properties stay with the government.
A bit of background:
2014: Jayalalithaa was found guilty in a disproportionate assets case. She got a 4-year jail term and a hefty ₹100 crore fine.
2015: The Karnataka High Court overturned this, acquitting her.
2016: Jayalalithaa passed away.
2017: The Supreme Court reinstated the trial court's decision for the other accused but said the case against Jayalalithaa was "abated" because of her death.
Deepa's argument:
She believed that since the case against her aunt was dropped after her death, the seized properties should return to the family. Plus, the Madras High Court had recognized Deepa and her brother as Jayalalithaa's legal heirs.
But the court's take:
The Supreme Court pointed out that their 2017 judgment didn't clear Jayalalithaa of the charges. They emphasized that ending the case due to her death wasn't the same as an acquittal. So, the confiscation of her properties still stands.
MediaFx's view:
This situation highlights the importance of accountability, regardless of one's position. 🕵️♀️🔍 It's crucial to ensure that public figures are held to the same standards as everyone else. The court's decision reinforces that justice doesn't get sidetracked by power or influence. 💪⚖️
What are your thoughts on this verdict? Do you think the court made the right call? Share your views in the comments below! 🗣️👇
