NEW DELHI, 19 November 2003 — Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayaram Jayalalitha suffered a major judicial blow yesterday as the Supreme Court ordered two corruption cases against her transferred to neighboring Karnataka state.

Admitting a petition filed by DMK leader Anbazaghan, the Supreme Court expressed dissatisfaction with judicial proceedings related to these cases in a Madras trial court. The cases filed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 have been pending in the lower court since 1997.

The Supreme Court questioned the fairness of the trial in Madras and ordered the constitution of a special court in Bangalore that will try the cases “as soon as possible.”

The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justice S.N. Variava and Justice H.K. Sema, said the cases were being transferred to Karnataka so as to maintain the sanctity of the justice delivery system and the faith of the common man in it.

“If free and fair trial was not done, public confidence in the justice delivery system will be shaken,” the bench said. It directed the chief justice of the Karnataka High Court to constitute a special court, appoint a special judge and appoint a senior advocate as public prosecutor — within six weeks — “to expeditiously conduct the trial in the two cases on a day to day basis.”

The bench also directed the crime branch of Tamil Nadu police to render all possible cooperation to the public prosecutor to be appointed by the Karnataka High Court. The new public prosecutor, the bench said, would be at liberty to call any witness and cross-examine him.

The cases emerge from a complaint filed by Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy who claimed that Jayalalitha’s wealth, estimated at 660 million rupees ($14.5 million), was disproportionate to her known sources of income.

The petitioners in the two cases have said that ever since Jayalalitha assumed power, 64 witnesses recanted their statements but the public prosecutor took no steps to declare them “hostile.”

Allowing the trial to continue in the “prevailing hostile atmosphere” in Madras, where Jayalalitha wields enormous power, would not the truth come out, the petitioners argued. It may become yet another Best Bakery case in which all the 21 accused in Gujarat were acquitted after 37 of the 43 witnesses turned hostile, the petitioners said.

The Supreme Court also took strong note of the petitioners’ allegation that Jayalalitha never appeared before the trial court and instead questionnaires were sent to her Poes Garden residence. This provision of the law is for application only in cases where witnesses live at a far-off places, so the court’s time is not wasted awaiting their presence, the bench said. Directing the Karnataka government to give full protection to witnesses who were to depose before the special court at Bangalore , the bench said that it was the Tamil Nadu government’s responsibility to ensure their presence before the Bangalore court “as and when required.”

The Supreme Court also directed the Tamil Nadu government to take steps for expedient transfer of case records and related documents to the Bangalore court.

The expenses borne by Karnataka in the process would be reimbursed by Tamil Nadu, the court ordered.