Justice A Raman, before whom the petitions came up for hearing, admitted them, and ordered notice to the CB CID. Originally, in her discharge petition, Jayalalitha had prayed for a direction to the CB CID to make available certain documents, which were essential for proceeding with the case. But the special court judge had rejected the plea.

Contending that the decision of the special judge is arbitrary, Jayalalitha submitted in her petition that the report of the Additional DGP (Crime) was one of the documents mentioned in the sanction order, as having been perused by the Governor, before according the sanction. She is entitled for a copy of this report.

The Supreme Court had stated that even while seeking a discharge, the accused is entitled to rely upon the defence documents. The judge had failed to see that the documents are necessary for proper defence. Whatever material gathered during investigation, irrespective of the question whether the prosecution proposes to rely on them or not, should be disclosed to the accused. When the accused comes to know the existence of certain documents, they should be furnished without any objection. Sasikala, a close friend of Jayalalitha, has also filed a similar petition in the High Court.