In her petition, Jayalalitha claimed that the special judge's order dated April 20, 1998, rejecting her discharge petition, went against the law. She contended that the main thrust of the offence sought to be made out by the prosecution was under Section 169 IPC, which states that a public servant shall be legally bound not to purchase certain properties in person. In the absence of any legal provision prohibiting a government servant from purchasing any `particular' property, no offence is made out even if he/she makes the purchase, Jayalalitha contended.

The prosecution had submitted that the purchase was against the code of conduct framed by the State Government.

In her petition, Jayalalitha said that the code of conduct, atthe very best, could only be a guideline and did not have the force of law. ``No where, under any law, is a public servant prohibited from purchasing a corporation property when the same comes up for sale in a public auction."

"Just because there is a change in the political scenario, it does not mean that a former chief minister be hauled up just to satisfy the present rulers,'' the former chief minister said. The petition further said that the charge-sheet against her was incorrect in every aspect and was filed only to harass her for political reasons.

The view of the trial court that Tansi was like any other Government department was incorrect and liable to be rejected, she said, and sought to set aside the trial court's order.