New Delhi: The Supreme Court will pronounce on Wednesday its verdict on whether there will be fresh hearing in the appeals filed by former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa and three others in the case by a trial court in Bengaluru. The high court had reserved verdict on March 11 in these appeals and the apex court had restrained the pronouncement of judgment till April 15.

A bench of justices Madan B Lokur and Ms R. Banumathi is likely to give two separate verdicts on the two issues, viz whether Bhavani Singh could have represented the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption, the prosecuting agency in the appeals, without a valid appointment and whether the DMK general secretary K. Anbazhagan be permitted to file written arguments in the case.

There is a possibility of a split verdict on Wednesday if two judges give orders. Both can also give concurring judgments with different reasons. If there is a split verdict the question of Mr Bhavani Singh’s appointment as SPP will have to be referred to three-judges and it is likely the pronouncement of judgment in the case by the Karnataka high court will be further deferred. If the bench dismisses DMK’s petitions, there will be no impediment for the Karnataka high court to give its judgment which has already been reserved.

It was the argument of DMK that once the case was transferred to another state, it was only that state which was empowered to appoint the public prosecutor and Mr Bhavani Singh could not represent the prosecution in the high court in the appeals. The DMK also wanted a direction to permit it to file written submissions justifying the trial court’s verdict convicting the accused.

It was Ms Jayalalithaa’s contention that since Mr Singh was appointed as the SPP for a particular case in the trial court, he was entitled to appear in the high court in the appeal as per Section 301 CrPC according to which a SPP appointed for a case could appear in any court, including the appellate court. It was argued that there was no bar on his appearance and if at all the Karnataka government could have appointed another SPP by canceling Bhavani Singh’s appointment. On behalf of Sasikala, Ilavarasi and Sudhakaran it was pointed out that once appointed as SPP in a high profile case, there was no bar on such SPP’s appearance in high court or the apex court.