Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

12. Defendant was cross-examined by the counsel for All India Congress Committee (I), Tamil Nadu Congress Committee (I), Shri V. Gopalaswamy, Dr.B.L.Vadhera, Sh.B.Dutta, counsel for the Commission, counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu and needless to state by counsel engaged by Ms.J.Jayalalitha.

13. The plaintiff, Shri Ram Jethmalani, Senior Advocate practicing in the Supreme Court of India was engaged as the senior counsel by Ms.J.Jayalalitha. Plaintiff cross-examined the defendant. In cross-examination, defendants stated that the number of informants who gave him the information was 3. He stated that he knew them but was not prepared to disclose their particulars. The defendant summarized his justification for the statement made by him that Ms.J.Jayalalitha had prior information of the assassination bid by referring to five circumstances being: (a) Prior to the assassination, three weeks after the assassination and the first week of July, Ms.J.Jayalalitha functioned as a propagandist of LTTE; (b) Her refusal to address public meetings with Late Shri Rajiv Gandhi even though she was a partner in charge of the elections jointly being fought in the State of Tamil Nadu by Congress (I) and AIADMK; (c) Her refusal to receive Late Shri Rajiv Gandhi at the Madras Airport which was contrary to her conduct as on previous occasions, she had received him at the airport; (d) the systematic pattern of escape from jail of hardcore LTTE personnel; (e) And lastly, the directions to the police to enable pro-LTTE organisations to hold public meetings.