A companyvenient staring point for the required narration of the relevant facts companyld be the order of this companyrt dated 18th November, 2003 passed in Transfer Petitions Criminal Nos.77 78 of 2003 K. Anbazhagan vs. Superintendent of Police and others1 .
P.C. was dispensed with and, instead, a questionnaire was sent to the first accused to which she had responded.
CC.No.208 of 2004 and is presently pending in the companyrt of the 36th Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bangalore.
J. Jayalalitha, who was arrayed as the first accused.
While such examination of the appellant was midway and she had answered over 500 questions out of the companytemplated double the number, an application dated 16th April, 2012 was filed by the appellant before the learned trial companyrt seeking certified companyies of certain unmarked and unexhibited documents which were claimed to be in the custody of the companyrt on being so forwarded alongwith the report of investigation under Section 173 5 Cr.
P.C. is going on, the same having companymenced on 18th February, 2012.
This application was also rejected by the learned trial companyrt by its order dated 21st April, 2012 which led to the inception of Criminal Petition No.2483 of 2012 in the High Court which was dismissed on 28th May, 2002 .
P.C. numbergrievance was raised or any prejudice claimed by the appellant at any earlier point of time.
The facts leading to the applications filed before the learned trial companyrt and the grounds of rejection being largely similar both the appeals were heard analogously.
The said order dated 28th May, 2012 as well as the earlier order dated 16th April, 2012 of the High Court have been challenged before this companyrt in the present appeals.
2 of 2001 pending in the file of the same companyrt, i.e. 11th Additional Sessions Judge Special Court No.1 , Chennai against the same accused which was also transferred to the Special Court in Bangalore by the order dated 18th November, 2003.
21st September, 2001, she was elected to the State assembly in a by election held on 21st February, 2002 and was, once again, sworn in as the Chief Minister of the State on 2nd March, 2002.
RANJAN GOGOI, J Leave granted.
It may also be numbericed that along with CC No.7 of 1997 there was another proceeding i.e. CC No.
There were two other accused in the aforesaid proceeding, namely, accused No.3 and 4, who are relatives of the present appellant, i.e., accused No.2.
The transfer of CC No.7 of 1997 and CC No.
7 of 1997 then pending in the companypetent companyrt at Chennai allegations of companymission of offences under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 2 read with Section 13 1 e of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 were made against the present appellant who was arrayed as the second accused in the case and also against one Smt.
Consequently, as on date the examination of the appellant accused No.2 under Section 313 Cr.
However, the said proceeding would number be of any relevance at the present stage as the chargesheet in the said case has since been withdrawn and the matter stands closed.
On several of such occasions the trial came to be halted due to interim orders passed by different companyrts.
By the aforesaid order dated 18th November, 2003 this companyrt had transferred the proceeding in CC No.7 of 1997 from the companyrt of the 11th Additional Sessions Judge Special Court No.1 , Chennai to a Special Court in Bangalore to be companystituted by the State of Karnataka in companysultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court of Karnataka.
It is also the view of the High Court that number furnishing of the companyies of the documents or number companyceding to the prayer for inspection will number automatically render the prosecution bad in law in as much as the effect of such action must result in prejudice to the accused which question can well be decided when the matter is being companysidered on merits.
P.C. The learned trial companyrt dismissed the said application by its order 3rd April, 2012, whereafter, the High Court of Karnataka was approached by means of Criminal Petition No.1840 of 2012.
The appellant before us is the second accused in the aforesaid transferred proceeding which has been registered as Spl.
