The Karnataka High Court, on Monday, January 13, rejected an appeal by the legal heirs of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa, who sought the release of her seized properties and assets in the 2004 disproportionate assets case. The appeal was moved by J Deepak and J Deepa after a lower court dismissed their earlier plea in July 2023. Justice V Srishananda, who heard the plea, observed that the trial court had not dismissed the legal heirs' petition on technical grounds but on merit, recognising their status as Jayalalithaa’s legal representatives. However, it held that their appeal was not valid, as the property had already been confiscated.
The court noted that the legal heirs had not provided sufficient details to prove that some of the seized assets were acquired before the investigation period. The judge observed that if they could submit proper evidence, the trial court would have to consider it. However, since the confiscation process had already begun, the appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
In an oral remark, the court suggested that Jayalalithaa’s heirs should consider setting up a foundation in her name to serve the poor. The court said that material wealth does not last and encouraged them to do good deeds that would bring peace to her legacy. “Alexander went with an empty hand, with one hand outside the grave to represent that he can't carry anything from here, definitely you can carry one thing. A large number of poor people are there in this society, make Jayalalitha foundation, spend money, make them feel happy,” the court observed.
The judge further added, “The puniya [blessings] you earn now you can take it back. Rightly, wrongly the court has now declared you as legal heirs you are entitled, do it, serve the poor, not only you will be having the satisfaction, but also the departed soul will rest in definitely in peace. Do such something. What has come to you is the gift of the god, be satisfied with what was available, lots of negative things would be there, one would not flourish with that is ill-gotten.”
Deepak and Deepa argued that since Jayalalithaa was convicted by the trial court, later acquitted by the High Court, and the appeal against her was abated after her death, she could not be considered a convict. Therefore, they claimed her property should be returned.
The prosecution opposed the appeal, stating that despite Jayalalithaa’s death, the Supreme Court had allowed the confiscation order issued by the trial court to remain in effect.