KIND ATTENTION - ALL BLOGGERS

DEAR FRIENDS, FROM 4.3.10 NIGHT, SOMEONE(SCOTLAND ADDRESS)HACKED MY E-MAIL gavinivn@gmail.com AND BEEN MIS-USING FOR WRONGFUL FINANCIAL GAIN. PLEASE DO NOT BELIEVE ANY STORY FROM THIS E-MAIL, IMPERSONATED BY HACKER IN THE NAME, GAVINI VENKATA NARAYANA, SEEKING FOR ANY HELP FINANCIAL OR OTHERWISE. THANKS.

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Now, its DMK top brass turn to face DA cases in SC

For years, DMK leader K Anbazhagan had tormented AIADMK supremo J Jayalalithaa by filing petition after petition relating to her alleged disproportionate assets. On Friday it was the turn of AIADMK to return the favour in Supreme Court.  On a petition filed by three AIADMK leaders challenging acquittal of 10 DMK leaders, including six ministers in the Karunanidhi government, in cases relating to alleged amassment of assets disproportionate to their know sources of income, a Bench comprising Justices Markandey Katju and A K Patnaik issued notice to them. Appearing for the petitioners,senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi argued that the state had refused to file appeals against their acquittal by the trial court as the law minister in the Karunanidhi government was also an accused. The ministers are S Armugham, D Durai Murugan, Periyasamy, KN Nehru, KOC Mani and MRK Paneerselvam. Notices were also sent to DMK leaders S Raghupathy and P Kulanthai Velu as well as to Ranganayagee, wife of S Armugham, and P Senthamizhselvam, wife of MRK Paneerselvam.
The petitioners, AIADMK leaders J M Arumugam, MGovindan and P Ravindran, had filed the appeal in the SC contending that the Madras high court erred in dismissing the appeal. The petitioner argued that when the ministers of a government were accused in DA case and ruling dispensation did not appeal against their acquittal,the public interest would suffer if a third party was not stopped from challenging their acquittal.

"The state did not challenge the order even when investigation held the respondents guilty under the Prevention of Corruption Act.The state failed in its duty in not filing the revision petition against the order,which has resulted in miscarriage of justice,"the petitioners said.
================================
(source-toi)

No comments:

Post a Comment