In a significant legal development, the Madras High Court has rejected Tamil Nadu Minister Anitha Radhakrishnan’s attempt to quash the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) proceedings against him. The court’s decision means that Radhakrishnan will continue to face scrutiny from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) over allegations of disproportionate assets.
Anitha Radhakrishnan, currently serving as Tamil Nadu’s Minister for Fisheries, Fishermen Welfare, and Animal Husbandry, previously held the position of Housing and Urban Development Minister from 2001 to 2006 with the AIADMK party. The case against him traces back to 2006 when the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) registered a case against Radhakrishnan and seven of his family members. The allegations suggest that they amassed wealth totalling Rs 2.26 crore during his ministerial tenure.
In 2020, the ED took action by filing an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) against Radhakrishnan, based on the FIR lodged by the DVAC. The ED’s investigation revealed that Radhakrishnan allegedly accumulated assets worth Rs 2.01 crore while he was serving as a minister. Following this, the ED attached properties valued at Rs 6.50 crore. The trial, which began in 2013, has been advancing with witness examinations nearing completion. Despite this, the ED sought to intervene in the case last year by filing a petition under Sections 301(2) and 302 of the CrPC. The petition aimed to allow the ED to assist the prosecution with documents and written submissions.
However, in July of the previous year, the Principal Sessions Court in Thoothukudi dismissed the ED’s plea to assist the DVAC in the ongoing disproportionate assets case against Radhakrishnan.
Radhakrishnan then approached the Madras High Court, seeking to quash the ECIR filed against him. He argued that the PMLA should not apply to his case, claiming that the law, enacted in July 2005, could not be applied retroactively. According to Radhakrishnan, Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which was incorporated into the PMLA as a scheduled offense only in June 2009, was not in effect during the period in question. He contended that since the relevant provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act were not part of the PMLA in 2005, the ECIR based on the 2006 disproportionate assets case should be invalid.
Radhakrishnan also argued that applying the PMLA retrospectively would violate Article 20(1) of the Indian Constitution, which prohibits the retroactive application of criminal laws. He maintained that since the Prevention of Corruption Act’s relevant provisions were not included in the PMLA at the time of the alleged offenses, the current proceedings were unjust.
On August 7, Justices SM Subramaniam and V Sivagnanam of the Madras High Court delivered their judgment, dismissing Radhakrishnan’s petition. The bench rejected all arguments presented by the minister for quashing the ECIR. The court directed Radhakrishnan to cooperate with the ongoing investigation and to assist in completing the money laundering probe.
The judgment followed a detailed examination of the arguments from Radhakrishnan’s counsel and the prosecution team. Additional Solicitor General AR. L Sundaresan, along with ED special public prosecutor N. Ramesh, opposed the plea for quashing the ECIR and related proceedings, arguing that the legal grounds presented by Radhakrishnan were insufficient.
This ruling ensures that the PMLA proceedings against Radhakrishnan will proceed, keeping him under legal scrutiny.
Comments