The Supreme Court on Monday (December 2, 2024) took a stern view of the appointment of V. Senthilbalaji as a senior Cabinet Minister of Tamil Nadu “straightaway” after getting bail from the apex court in a money laundering case.
A Bench headed by Justice A.S. Oka was hearing an application seeking the withdrawal of its bail order of September 26, 2024.
“What is this? There are serious charges against him, and he straightaway becomes a Minister! This must stop. People would be justified now for their apprehension that witnesses would come under pressure,” Justice Oka addressed senior advocate Siddhartha Luthra, appearing for the Tamil Nadu government.
Mr. Senthilbalaji, represented by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi and advocate Ram Sankar, was sworn in as a Cabinet Minister on September 29. He is accused of playing a “central and pivotal role” in the “job racket scam” during his tenure as Minister. The case involves kickbacks for jobs in the Metropolitan Transport Corporation of Chennai and Tamil Nadu State Corporation when Mr. Balaji was the Transport Minister.
Justice Oka emphasised that the “basic principle here is that justice should not only be done, but manifestly seen to be done”.
Reiterating the law laid down in the Senthilbalaji bail judgment that liberty cannot be withheld as a form of punishment, Justice Oka said its focus now would only be confined to the subsequent factual development of Mr. Senthilbalaji’s appointment as a Minister in this particular case.
The court, which did not issue formal notice in the case, said it would hear the allegation raised in the current application that now the witnesses would “not be in the frame of mind to oppose the Cabinet Minister”. The court listed the case for further hearing on December 13.
The application was filed by K. Vidhya Kumar, one of the alleged victims of the cash-for-jobs scam. The money laundering case is linked to the scam. The application was filed through advocate Neha Rathi. Advocate R. Balaji appeared in the case.
The ED had said bank statements show cash deposits of ₹1.34 crore in the account of Mr. Senthilbalaji and ₹29.55 lakh in that of S. Megala, his wife. Further, cash deposits of ₹13.13 crore were found with his brother Ashok Kumar and ₹53.89 lakh with his wife A. Nirmala and ₹2.19 crore with B. Shanmugam, Mr. Senthilbalaji’s private assistant.
However, the apex court had granted him bail on the ground that the trial of the scheduled offences and, consequently, the PMLA offence were not likely to be completed in three to four years or even more.
“If the appellant’s (Senthilbalaji) detention is continued, it will amount to an infringement of his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution of speedy trial,” Justice Oka, who authored the September 26 verdict, had reasoned.
Mr. Senthilbalaji had by then been incarcerated for over 15 months. The three FIRs and several chargesheets covering scheduled offences, including criminal conspiracy, cheating and corruption, had arraigned over 2000 accused and more than 600 witnesses.
The apex court had noted he had already undergone a substantial part of the prescribed sentence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The Bench had observed that stringent conditions enumerated in bail provisions like Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act and Section 45 of PMLA must not be used as the “sole metric for denial of bail or for wholesale breach of constitutional right to speedy trial”.
Remove
SEE ALL