Tamil Nadu Cash-for-Jobs Scam
On August 7, the Supreme Court of India dismissed DMK Minister Senthil Balaji’s plea challenging Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) right to seek custody in the ‘Tamil Nadu Cash-for-Jobs Scam’ case, wherein it is alleged that the DMK Minister, along with certain government officials, accepted bribes in exchange for appointments to the state transport corporation between 2011 and 2015. Furthermore, the apex court has allowed the ED to have Senthil Balaji’s custody till August 12 in the case.
The Supreme Court’s Division Bench, comprising Justices AS Bopanna and MM Sundresh, dismissed the petitions challenging the Madras High Court’s decision wherein the court held that the ED’s right to seek custody could not be denied.
The Madras High Court, on July 14, held that while in the Vijay Madanlal case, it was held that ED officials are not police officers, it did not state that ED officials cannot take custody. The Madras High Court said that if the ED requires custody for investigation, it can be sought as a “matter of right.”
Furthermore, the apex court held that the writ of habeas corpus is not maintainable against ED’s arrest and that the order of remand cannot be challenged in a habeas corpus petition. The court said that if there has been a violation of procedure as prescribed u/s 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, then action can be taken against the concerned officer u/s 62 of the PMLA.
The Supreme Court was hearing a habeas corpus petition moved by the accused minister’s wife, Megala, accusing the ED officials of not following due procedure, including intimating the accused of the ground of arrest, as per the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The petitioner sought that Senthil Balaji’s arrest is declared illegal for ED’s alleged failure to comply with the procedure.
Background
The accused DMK Minister had moved the Supreme Court on July 17 to challenge the Madras High Court’s July 14 decision to allow ED to take Senthil Balaji’s custody in the ‘Tamil Nadu Cash-for-Jobs Scam’ case.
“The fact that respondents (ED) can take custody for further investigation cannot be denied. The respondent, in this case, had a right to get custody. I would align my opinion with the reason given by Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy in this aspect,” the third-judge Justice CV Karthikeyan, to whom the case was referred to after the high court’s Division Bench rendered a split verdict, said.
Senthil Balaji’s counsel Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that ED officials are not police officers. Justice Karthikeyan responded, “The respondents are not police officers. They have never been characterized as police officers anywhere in the Act. This assertion of the learned counsel cannot also be denied or disputed by the respondents.”
Kapil Sibal further argued that custody cannot be given to ED officials as they are not police officers. However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta countered Sibal’s submissions referring to Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act to say that ED can exercise police powers. The Solicitor General further argued if judicial remand can be passed, custodial interrogation order can also be passed.
“It had been held in Vijay Madanlal that ED are not police officials, but nowhere it was said that they cannot take custody. If investigation requires custody, then custody can be sought as a matter of right,” the court ruled.
The court further rejected the arguments contending that the arrest was illegal. “I reject the argument that grounds of arrest were not informed, because money laundering is not a standalone offence that does not have any background. The respondents were at his doors since June 13. He should have known why. He can’t claim innocence,” Justice Karthikeyan said.
Senthil Balaji, the Minister for Electricity, Prohibition and Excise, was arrested on June 14 and admitted to a government hospital in Chennai after he complained of chest pain. On June 15, the Madras High Court allowed him to be shifted to a private hospital of his choice.
The ED had arrested Balaji in connection with an Enforcement Case Information Register (ECIR) filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act in 2021. The ECIR was registered based on three FIRs booked against him by the local police in 2018 for his alleged involvement in a Tamil Nadu Cash-for-Jobs scam when he was the Transport Minister in Jayalalithaa’s Cabinet in 2015.
The charges date back to his tenure as transport minister during the AIADMK government from 2011 to 2015. He joined the DMK in December 2018 and assumed office as the Electricity Minister after the party came to power in May 2021.
Leave a Comment