On 11 11 2002 itself W.196 Hajaj Ahmed, a tailor who was entrusted with the task of tailoring the marriage dress of the 5th Respondent herein the fourth accused was cross examined.
PW 126 Krishnamurthy was examined in chief on 10.2.2000 and 2.3.2000 recalled and cross examined on 2.1.2003 and 23.1.2003 resiled from his previous statement.
On the subsequent day of 13 11 2002 P.W. 147 Madan Lal, P.W. 186 Chalapathy Rao and P.W. 219 S.Usman were cross examined.
PW 155 Subburaj was examined in chief on 12.5.2000 recalled and cross examined on 22.1.2003 by A1, A2 and A4 resiled from his previous statement.
On his chief examination which took place on 16 6 2000 Shri Arunachalam was cited as a witness by the DVAC.
The trial stood adjourned to 18 11 2002.
174 Mani and W. 206 Abdul Jaffar.
In 1980 Shri Natarajan got back the post and he became a Deputy Director in 1988.
He was cross examined on the accounts maintained by Mrs. Sasikala a close associate of Ms.J.Jayalalitha as well as the accounts maintained by Sasikalas relatives.
On 3 2 2003 in the Crl.
The rest of the statements companytained in paragraphs 25 to 33 have number been companytroverted.
The five witnesses who were examined on this date were P.W.127 Rajseshwari, W.180 Suseela, P.W.143 Geethalakshmi, PW.
In his chief examination on 31 5 2000 Shri R.Krishnamoorthy had deposed that Shri Natarajan, husband of Sasikala joined the social welfare department as a Publicity Assistant on 13 5 1970 and he became an Information and Public Relation Officer on 13 11 1970.
They were P.W.183 Ramesh, P.W. 198 Jayaraman, W. 216 Naziruddin and P.W.218 V.M. Somasundaram.
PW 116 Jayabal was examined in chief on 23.12.1999 cross examined by A1 on 6.1.2000 and 13.1.2000 re examined on 13.1.2000 recalled and cross examined on 30.12.2002, 31.12.2002 and 2.1.2003 by A1, A2 and A4 resiled from his previous statement.
The depositions of witnesses Mr. Krishnamurthy and Mr. Balaji have number been accurately summarised by him.
AIADMK party headed by the second respondent was defeated in the General Election held in 1996 and DMK party was voted to power.
In the companynter of the second respondent also the statements made in paragraphs 25 to 33 of the petition have number been companytroverted.
Consequently on 4 2 2003 P.W.46 Shri G.Gopinath, P.W.51 Shri Amarnath Mariacose, P.W.84 Shri Ayyadurai, P.W.141 Shri M.Swaminathan and P.W.201 Shri K.R.K.Vidhyasagar were summoned and cross examined by the Accused.
In that cross examination he has stated that what he has deposed in the Chief Examination in the year 2000 was under pressure.
In this companynection it is pertinent to point out that it is companymon knowledge that number of witnesses have been cross examined before the trial came to a pause due to reconstitution of the Special Courts.
The second respondent has filed a detailed companynter.
SEMA,J These two petitions have been preferred under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking transfer of CC No.7 of 1997 and CC No.
M.P.No.125 of 2003 filed on behalf of Respondent No.4/Accused No.3 for recall of witnesses Special Public Prosecutor made an endorsement that he had numberobjection for allowing the petition.
On 18.11.2002 five witnesses were recalled and cross examined by the Counsel for the accused.
Similarly during the trial at the end of January 2003, P.W. 237 Shri S.S.Jawahar, I.A.S. formerly working as Deputy Secretary who was examined as prosecution witness in the year 2000 was recalled at the instance of the Accused and was cross examined.
The fourth accused Shri Sudhagaran is the sisters son of the second accused Mrs. Sasikala.
The next date of effective proceedings were on 2 12 2002 on which date four more witnesses were examined.
Trial of CC No.7 of 1977 progressed and by August 2000, 250 prosecution witnesses had been examined.
7/97 against the 2nd Respondent Chief Minister Ms.J.Jayalalitha and others resumed on the 7 11 2002.
Accurate narration has number been made by the petitioner, in so far as the instances set out by him.
In 2001, CC No.2/2001 was filed on the file of Principal Special Judge, Chennai.
After recording the above endorsement the Special Court allowed recall of witnesses for cross examination by the Accused, who were all examined more than 2 years back.
PW 130 Maran was examined in chief and cross examined on 9.3.2000 recalled and cross examined on 13.12.2002 resiled from his previous statement.
Special companyrts were companystituted for the trial of cases filed against the second respondent and others, the companystitution of which came to be upheld by this Court.
All the above witnesses have stated that their earlier deposition in Chief examination was given under pressure.
On 12 11 2002 P.W. 184 a tourist car operator was cross examined.
When the trial resumed on 7 11 2002 Indian Bank Official Shri A.R. Arunachalam was cross examined.
7 was filed for the trial of respondent number.
Sessions Judge Special Court No.1 Chennai in the State of Tamil Nadu to a companyrt of equal and companypetent jurisdiction in any other State.
PW 135 Parthasarathy was examined in chief on 25.4.2000, 2.5.2000, 12.5.2000 and 17.5.2000 recalled and cross examined on 6.1.2003 by A1, A2 and A4 resiled from his previous statement.
The other witness who was examined on the said day was P.W.234 Mohamed Asumathulla Hussain who is Block Development Officer of Siruvathoor village in Thiruporur Taluk.
3,4 and 5 have adopted the companynter of respondent No.2.
PW 129 Namasi was examined in chief and cross examined on 9.3.2000 recalled and re examined on 13.12.2002.
Counter on behalf of the second respondent has been filed.
It is submitted that it is ascertained that another witness Shri Krishnamoorthy of Saidapet who was working as a Section officer in the Inormation and Tourism Department of Government of Tamil Nadu at the relevant point of time was also cross examined.
Public Prosecutor has number disputed this number put any suggestion companytroverting the above statement.
He further deposed in his chief examination that Shri Natarajan was in the said post till 1976 till the abolition of the post.
Respondent No.3 has denied the companyrectness of the statement made by the petitioner in respect of PW 126 R. Krishnamoorthy and PW 230 N.V. Balaji.
The Public Prosecutor has number made any effort to declare them hostile and cross examine them.
He was an official of the Indian Bank at the relevant point of time.
Thereafter, in 1997, CC No.
Respondent No.1 has also filed a detailed companynter.
2 of 2001 on the file of the XI Addl.
2 with the help of Mr.T.T.V. Dinakaran from India to outside companyntry by violating the provisions of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and from other companyntries into the United Kingdom.
The present petitions were filed on 5.2.2003.
25.4.2000 and 5.5.2000 recalled and cross examined on 6.1.2003 resiled from his previous statement.
PW 134 Rajendran was examined in chief and cross examined on 12.4.2000.
His statement was made orally companytrary to his deposition in chief examination, unsupported by any Assessment returns or other documentary evidence.
In fact respondent number.
P.W.171 Abdul Razack, Village Administrative Officer of Thiruthuraipoondi village was examined on that date.
The Special Judge has ordered summons as per the process list as prepared by the Special Court.
The Trial companytinued on 19 11 2002 and two witnesses were examined.
