21-year-old disproportionate assets case

14.06.1996:  Dr Subramanian Swamy files a private complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C before the principal district and sessions judge, Chennai against Jayalalithaa.

21.06.1996:  The principal district and sessions judge directs Latika Saran, IPS, to investigate the private complaint.

18.09.1996:  The then government directs DVAC to register a first information report against Jayalalithaa for allegedly possessing assets disproportionate to known sources of income.

22.01.1997:  Sasikala, Sudhakaran and Ilavarasi were impleaded as accused A2 to A4 in the said case.

2.06.1997:  Sanction granted to prosecute  Jayalalithaa under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

4.06.1997:  Final report/charge-sheet was filed before the XI additional sessions judge, Chennai (designated as the Special Court, Chennai),  fixing the check period as 01.07.1991 to 30.04.1996 under Sec. 120-B IPC r/w Secs. 13(1) (e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (‘PC Act’), Secs.13(2) 13(1)(e) of the PC Act and Sec. 109 IPC r/w 13(1)(e) of the PC Act, 1988.

21.10.1997:  The judge framed charges against A1 to A4 for the offences punishable under Sec. 120-B IPC r/w Secs.13(2) and 13(1)(e) of the PC Act against Accused Nos. 1 to 4 for offence punishable under Secs. 13(2) and 13(1)(e) of the PC Act against the Petitioner/Accused No. 1 and for the offence punishable under Section 109 IPC r/w Secs.13(2) and 13(1)(e) of the PC against Accused Nos.2 to 4. All the accused persons pleaded not guilty. Thereafter, trial commenced in the case. The prosecution examined about 259 witnesses.

Ilavarasi filed an application for re-call of some witnesses and questioned them.

2000: The investigating officer on the dictate of the then government in power, registered a separate FIR against Jayalalithaa and Dinakaran for the very same offence invoking the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The offence alleged related to an alleged purchase of a hotel in London.

2.09.2000:  The investigating officer filed a separate charge-sheet against the petitioner and another accused for the very same offences, and for the very same check period but before a separate/different court being the court of the principal sessions Judge, Chennai (the ‘second case’). The timing of the chargesheet was only to cause political embarrassment and harassment since the elections were scheduled at that time

18.11.2003: The then finance minister of the state,  K. Anbazhagan of the rival DMK filed a transfer petition before Supreme Court for transfer of the pending two cases from outside the State of Tamil Nadu. Apex court allowed the transfer of cases to a court in Bangalore with a  direction to proceed with the cases form such stage, he considered fit and in accordance with law.

2003-05: On transfer to the special court, Bangalore, the main case and the second case were re-numbered as special C.C. Nos. 208/2004 and 209/2004 respectively. The pending application for clubbing was taken up for consideration.

27.6.2005:  The special judge passed orders on the petitioner’s application for clubbing. The Court ordered that the records in the second case be merged with the records in the main case and directed that the main case be proceeded with by holding a joint trial after following the procedure prescribed for warrant trial

July - Aug, 2005: K. Anbazhagan again moved apex court against the aforesaid orders dated 20.6.2005 and 27.6.2005. Apex Court while issuing notice in the special leave petitions granted a stay of all further proceedings in the proceedings before the special judge. The stay was lifted on 22.1.2010 and London hotel case was closed.

January 2010: The special public prosecutor filed an application to recall 46 prosecution witnesses, who according to him did not support the version of the prosecution. However, he examined only 23 prosecution witnesses and dispensed with examination of the remaining witnesses. Such an examination though illegal and objected to by the accused was over ruled by the special judge.

September/November 2011: Jayalalithaa appeared before the special court at Bangalore and answered all the questions put to her under Section 313 (1) (b) Cr.P.C.

02.03.20012: Supreme Court orders recording the statement of Sasikala in her Cr.P.C. 313 statement and said answers given by her in Tamil must be accurately translated in English and also to keep the said record in court.

August 2012: Special public prosecutor B.V. Acharya resigned. In the meanwhile the special judge also attained superannuation.

November 2012: a new special judge was appointed to the special court. December 2012 to January 2013. Accused 2 to 4 were examined under Section 313 (1) (b) CrPC.

2.02.2013: Mr. G. Bhavani Singh was appointed as Special Public Prosecutor.27.08.2013: the Government of Karnataka issues a notification withdrawing his appointment.

30-09-2013: Supreme Court reinstates Bhavani Singh as SPP.

26-05-2014: Supreme Court stays the trial.

17-06-2014:  SC lifts stay on trial.

August 28, 2014: Arguments conclude in trial court

27-09-2014: Jayalalithaa and three others convicted and sentenced to undergo four years imprisonment. While Jayalalithaa was and directed to pay '100 crore as fine, three others were imposed a fine of Rs 10 crore. They were sent to jail to serve the sentence.

29-09-2014: TN govt appoints Bhavani Singh as prosecutor in the appeals in Karnataka HC.

17-10-2014: Supreme Court grants bail to Jayalalithaa and three others. They come out of jail next day.

18-12-2014: Supreme Court directs Karnataka HC to complete Jayalalithaa’s appeal in three months

5-01-2015: Justice Kumaraswami begins hearing the appeals; concludes on March 11 and reserves orders.

February 26: Mr. Anabazhagan moves apex court against Bhavani Singh’s appointment

April 15: Supreme Court gives split verdict on Bhavani Singh’s appointment.

April 18: SC grants time till May 12 for Justice Kumaraswami to deliver judgment

April 27: Supreme Court directs Justice Kumaraswami to ignore Bhavani Singh’s submissions and take into consideration submissions of Karnataka government and Anbazhagan.

April 27: Anbazhagan submits his written submissions. Karnataka govt appoints B.V. Acharya as special public prosecutor and he submits written submissions on April 28.

May 11, 2015: HC acquits all the four, quashes lower court’s findings

May 23, 2015: Karnataka moves SC against acquittal

June 7, 2016: SC reserves verdict after elaborate arguments for four months

December 5, 2016: Main accused Jayalalithaa passes away

February 14, 2017: SC to decide the fate of remaining three accused.