Bar & Bench: Karnataka: Wednesday, May 24, 2017.
Earlier this
year, the Supreme Court delivered its judgement in the disproportionate assets
case against former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa and her aides. The
case crawled through various courts for more than two decades, causing a
significant dent to the public exchequer.
So just how
much did the Karnataka government spend on counsel fees to fight the case in
the Special Court?
Before
revealing that answer, it is pertinent to note how the authorities have acted
on the RTI application filed way back in November of last year. The initial
response to the query ‘How much did the Karnataka government spend on court
fees and counsel fees in the Jayalalithaa disproportionate assets case from
1996 to 2016’ was a denial under Section 8 of the Act. The reason? The Supreme
Court had not yet decided the case.
A subsequent
appeal filed after the apex court pronounced its judgment in the case in
February this year received multiple responses. First, the law department sent
a reply that the application was being transferred to the ‘relevant authority’.
Then, another reply came from the Advocate General’s office stating that the
application was being considered.
Finally, the
Home Department sent a positive response on April 28. However, the information
therein would be incomplete, as it only covered the period during which the
trial took place in the Special Court. The information on the amounts spent in
the High Court and the Supreme Court, is therefore, missing.
The
information below pertains to the period between September 9, 2007 to September
27, 2014, the date on which Special Judge (now Justice) John Michael Cunha
convicted Jayalalithaa, Sasikala and others.
Who were
the lawyers involved?
The state
government was represented by Senior Advocate BV Acharya, who was assisted by
Sandesh Chouta. The duo argued for Karnataka from 2007 to 2012.
Then, in
2013, Bhavani Singh was appointed Special Public Prosecutor in the case. He was
assisted by Murgesh Maradi; they would go on to get a conviction in September
2014.
How much
did they earn?
Lawyer Fees earned
Bhavani Singh 96,80,000
BV Acharya 40,75,000
Sandesh
Chouta 24,00,000
Murgesh
Maradi 23,57,500
TOTAL
1,85,12,500
As mentioned
above, the state government spent a total of Rs. 1.85 crore on counsel fees
during the aforementioned period. Bhavani Singh earned the most with 96 lakh,
more than double the 40 lakh Acharya took home.
How much
did the lawyers get paid per hearing?
The
government paid a different amount for ‘Effective’ and ‘Non-Effective’ hearings
that took place. The former, presumably, means an instance wherein the court
did not simply adjourn the matter without hearing. Also, quite naturally, the
junior advocate was paid lesser than the SPP.
Acharya,
being a designated Senior Advocate, got paid Rs. 50,000 per ‘Effective
Appearance’ and Rs. 25,000 per ‘Non-Effective Appearance’. Chouta, on the other
hand, was paid Rs. 15,000 per effective hearing and Rs. 7,500 per non-effective
hearing. Maradi took home the same amount per hearing. Bhavani Singh, however,
was paid Rs. 60,000 per effective hearing and Rs. 30,000 per non-effective
hearing.
How many
hearings took place?
After Singh’s
appointment as SPP was cleared, more than 150 hearings took place until the
judgment was passed by the trial court. Singh himself appeared in 144 effective
hearings and 18 non-effective hearings, while Maradi was part of 136 effective
hearings and 29 non-effective hearings.
The period prior
to 2013 more than 180 hearings, with Sandesh Chouta appearing in 121 effective
hearings and 65 non-effective hearings. However, Acharya appeared only a total
of 91 times.