Chitra Subramaniam and Dhanya Rajendran | October 1, 2014 | 4:06pm ISTBangalore : Justice John Michael Cunha’s judgment is a systematic demolition of all the arguments put forward by

Jayalalithaa’s defence. The 896-page order, which the newsminute has exclusive access to, pins the bulk of the blame on Jayalalithaa and says that she was “the only source for the

acquisition of the large assets”.Judge Cunha says that the others had “no real source of income” and that the “public servant [Jayalalithaa]” was the “real source”. The

judgment goes on to describe Sasikala as an “agent” of Jayalalithaa.Among the first arguments of the defence that the judge rejects is that the entire case was politically motivated by

‘Amma’ being in jail.Slamming Jayalalithaa’s argument that she received Rs. 2 crore and foreign remittances as birthday gifts, the judge notes that these gifts were received after she

became CM and therefore “create serious doubts and suspicions”. He rejects these gifts as “illegal sources of income”.Page 198 to 240 clinically demolish Jayalalithaa’s claim that

a bulk of her wealth was mustered through deposits ranging between Rs. 12,000 and Rs. 18,000 made by common AIADMK supporters with Namadhu MGR – the party mouthpiece. The judgement says

that the Jayalalithaa has “not produced any material” to prove that Namadhu MGR had floated a deposit scheme inviting subscriptions from the general public. â€œAs a matter of fact, even

a copy of Namadhu MGR of the relevant period is not produced before the court which would have helped the court in ascertaining whether the newspaper is merely an official newsletter of the

AIADMK party and was sold for general consumption.”The Judge has also rejected claims that one of the companies run by Jayalalitha and Sasikala called Jaya Publications had any agriculture

income.Regarding the wedding expenses of Jayalalitha’s foster son Sudhakaran, the Judge has concluded that Rs. 8 crores and 50 lakhs were spent.“Taking into consideration all facts and

circumstances, a sum of Rs. 3 crores is taken as the expenses incurred by Jayalalitha towards the arrangement for the marriage of Sudhakaran."The judge has dismissed all explanations

given by Jayalalithaa and others for the enormous credits in their bank accounts. In page 881 he says, “…whatever explanation offered by the accused by way of confirmatory letters are

proved to be false and bogus. “Rejecting all the income tax filings by all the accused, the judge says "...the accused have rested their defence solely on the balance sheets and

profit and loss accounts statements said to have been filed before the IT authorities...he says the said documents are not proved in accordance with law and they are not in compliance with

the statutory requirements." He further states that the "...auditors examined by the accused are found to be propped up to support the false defence set up by the accused.The judge

then say that the P&L accounts "...were manouevered solely with a view to offer an explanation to the huge unexplained credits entered in their respective bank accounts.

""As a result the accused have failed to prove their defence even by the standard of preponderence of probability."The money trail in the case has been largely established by

witness accounts of two people Ramavijayan and Jayaraman working in the Poes Garden residence of Jayalalitha.After scrutiny of chalaans pay-in slips and bank accounts, the judge concludes

that these two people were depositing the money given to them by Sasikala in the names of various shell companies floated by all the accused. He also establishes that all the money credited

to various accounts of companies, firms etc. had originated in accounts belonging to Jayalalithaa and Sasikala.Establishing beyond an iota of doubt that there was no political vendetta in

the case, the verdict shows the money trail, the camouflaging or the same, shell companies and money-runners as well as a wide web of people working to generate income solely on the basis of

the fact that it is for Jayalalithaa and without her as the pivotal figure, none of the monies would have been transferred.The judge has questioned government officials for bending the

rules as well as turning a blind eye when rules were openly flouted. He has also questioned the relationship between Jayalalithaa and Sasikala asking why the latter was living in the same

house.Also Read:This is how Jayalalithaa is supposed to pay the Rs.100 crore fineIt's a political witch hunt, Jayalalithaa told the judge after he held her guilty in DA case The

Jayalalithaa DA case in a nutshell