Tags:
Journalism of Courage
CHENNAI, JANUARY 12: Former AIADMK MLA from Bhuvanagiri G Malliga was on Wednesday convicted to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment (RI) by Special Judge I S Sambandam on charges of illegally amassing wealth to the tune of over Rs 2.35 crore. The judge also imposed a fine (since paid) of Rs one lakh failing which the accused will undergo RI for an additional six months.
Following the judgment, Malliga was taken to the Chennai Central Prison in the evening, where she will be “provisionally” confined as a special class’ prisoner. Malliga has thus earned the dubious distinction of being the first woman politician in the State to be sent to jail under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) and also to be awarded the “maximum possible punishment” under the Act.
While pronouncing the 81-page verdict, the judge came down heavily on the accused and their lawyers for making a “mockery of the court and its proceedings.”
The conviction came in a dramatic manner when the judge dismissed a memo filed by Malliga seeking adjournment of Wednesday’s scheduled final arguments in the case and chose to exercise his powers under Section 248 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPc). The provision enables a Special Judge to deliver the verdict without hearing the final arguments of the prosecution and defence advocates.
As the judge read out the offences committed by the accused, a visibly tense and upset Malliga heard them, sitting on a stool. At 11.40 am, when her views were sought to the charges, the ex-MLA replied, choking, that she would “bow to the judicial verdict.” Thereafter, she pleaded with the judge: “If you consciously feel that I have earned wealth disproportionate to my known sources of income then my entire property may be taken over by the Government. But please set me free as the mistake (of accumulating wealth) might have happened without my knowledge. Please show some mercy.”
Rejecting her plea, the judge referring to certain petitions filed “with a view to protract the trial in the case”, and said that, “from the beginning you have been mocking at the judiciary. The accused was also instrumental in this. Therefore, I do not want to show any mercy to you.” Sambandam went on to say that he virtually had a re-birth on every hearing (as the torture was too much) and asked, “Has there been one occasion where I have heard the case happily? Can you keep saying anything about a judge? Do you think that the High Court would not come to the rescue of a judge (like me)?”
In an emotionally-worded (separate) order, Sambandam observed: “Frankly speaking, the preceding night before each hearing I have deeply yearned hoping that the day would not dawn at all. In fact, this case was in such a state that the judge was wounded in the open court (by the defence) whenever possible.” He concluded saying that in his 29-year judicial service, in no other similar case was he wounded as much as he was now.
When Malliga submitted that she had actually expected a lesser sentence, the judge shot back saying he would be the first to acquit an innocent person. But in this case he was convicting her with a heavy heart.
