Daijiworld Media Network - Bengaluru (SP) 

Bengaluru, Nov 5: Wide contrast has been witnessed in opinions being expressed by legal experts about the submission of the audio tape consisting of Yediyurappa's reported admission at having influenced legislators from other parties to resign and that union home minister was the mastermind behind this exercise. 

Some legal luminaries feel that the submission of the recording of Yediyurappa's address to party workers at Hubballi to the Supreme Court is irrelevant and out of context. Some others feel that there are chances of the recording being admitted as a strong evidence, and feel that it might change the entire direction in which the case is moving.

Former advocate general of Karnataka, B V Acharya, feels that the Supreme Court might not consider the new evidence as normally supplementary things are not taken into consideration once arguments and counter arguments conclude. "The statement in the recording is said to be of Yediyurappa, who is a third party. He is not a party to the suit. How can the statement of a third person be taken on record? If the disqualified legislators had made this admission, it would have gone against them," he added. 

Acharya said that if the Supreme Court admits the record, then it will have to allow Yediyurappa to place his arguments in tune with the principle of natural justice. There is question of proving genuineness of the voice. Preliminary investigation may be ordered into the genuineness of the tape. The video may have to be sent by the Speaker and legal processes will have to be followed, which will take lot of time," he said. 

Another former advocate general, Prof Ravivarma Kumar, felt that this evidence may be considered by the Supreme Court, as there have been incidents in which recordings were taken in as evidence even after arguments in the case have concluded. However, the person to whom the voice belongs may have to be heard, which will take time," he opined. 

Former advocate general, Ashok Harnahalli, feels that the evidence now provided is irrelevant and it cannot be taken on record now as the case is about the Speaker's order being right or wrong. More important is what the disqualified legislators have said, not Yediyurappa, he stressed. 

Supreme Court advocate, K V Dhananjaya, said that the disqualified legislators have stated that they resigned because of corruption and maladministration of the coalition government. Congress and JD(S) argued that the MLAs had joined hands with the BJP. As this is pertaining to the very important matter of resignation by legislators, it is possible to admit this as evidence, he said.