The Madras High Court informs the Supreme Court

The Madras High Court has informed the Supreme Court that the corruption and fraud cases arising out of the cash-for-jobs scam in which Tamil Nadu minister Senthil Balaji is the first accused have now been assigned to a low-volume district judge, who will only deal with these specific cases.

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih recorded:

“Pursuant to the order of this Court dated September 30, 2024, there is a report filed by the Registrar General of the Madras High Court. The report states that the decision was taken to transfer to the file of the Special Court no. 1 (under District Judges) for hearing criminal cases relating to MLA and MLA, Chennai, where the number of pending cases is only three as on the date of report.”

On September 30The Supreme Court has directed the Madras High Court to appoint another sessions judge to handle the trial, due to the heavy workload of the judge overseeing cases involving MPs and MLAs. The court emphasized that the trial should be assigned to a judge who would not be overburdened, noting the scale of this case involving more than 2,000 accused and 600 accused witnesses.

Today, senior counsel Gopal Sankarnarayanan for the plaintiffs also sought the appointment of a special public prosecutor to whom the prosecution should report. He argued: “The Prosecutor reports to the Director of Public Prosecutions who reports to the Ministry of the Interior, which is headed by the Chief Minister. Chief Minister Mr Stalin tweeted openly saying that Senthil Balaji was wrongfully imprisoned, framed etc. This chain of command will not work if justice is seen. I request that this court appoint a special prosecutor to whom the prosecutor should appear. There should be no indirect reporting to the accused.”

Justice Oka questioned whether the Supreme Court could direct a prosecutor to report to another prosecutor. Sankarnarayanan replied that this has been done in case of 2G spectrum and said that he will file an application in this regard.

Background

During Balaji’s tenure as the transport minister in Tamil Nadu between 2011 and 2016, he along with his associates were accused of accepting money in return for promises of employment in the transport department. Several complaints have been filed by job seekers who claimed they paid money but did not secure a job.

Balaji faces charges under Section 420 (cheating) and other sections of the IPC and Sections 7, 12 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Based on this, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has registered a case of money laundering of the money and arrested. in June 2023. Advocate Zoheb Hossain, representing the ED, said earlier DEPOSIT before the Supreme Court that of the three predicate offenses against Balaji, one case involves over 2,000 accused persons.

Earlier, the Madras High Court had refused bail to Balaji. The High Court found no merit in Balaji’s claims of falsification of evidence, noting that the investigation was based on documents already present in the main offence, which were not contested by Balaji.

Despite Balaji’s argument that he was no longer a minister, the High Court noted that his continuation as minister without portfolio after his arrest indicated his significant influence. The court observed that Balaji’s influence could lead to potential witness tampering, especially since there were previous allegations that he would try to compromise the main crime.

Aggrieved by the denial of bail, Balaji approached the Supreme Court, which granted him bail on the grounds of delay in the trial of money laundering cases as well as predicate offences.

During the bail hearings, the Supreme Court raised questions on the the feasibility of proceeding with the PMLA process without completion of the trial in the main offenceinvolving over two thousand accused.

Case no. – MA 1381/2024 in Crl.A. no. 1677/2023

Case Title – Y. Balaji v. Deputy Commissioner of Police Central Crime Branch (Racketing) And Anr.