The Supreme Court has stayed all ongoing investigations by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) into alleged irregularities involving Tamil Nadu’s state-run liquor distribution arm, the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), on May 22. The matter is alleged to involve corruption amounting to over Rs 1,000 crore.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih strongly criticised the ED for initiating action and conducting raids against a government-run body. The court issued a notice to the ED on a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by TASMAC, challenging the Madras High Court’s April 23 order which had dismissed a batch of three writ petitions filed by the state and TASMAC, seeking to declare the search and seizure as illegal. The apex court also sought a reply from the ED and scheduled the matter for further hearing after the vacation, without specifying a date.
The Court, while raising concerns over the ED’s conduct, granted a stay in favour of the State and TASMAC.
The Supreme Court observed that the ED’s actions violated the federal structure of the Constitution, adding that the probe against TASMAC shall not proceed in the interim. Addressing ASG SV Raju, appearing for the ED, the court remarked, “Your Enforcement Directorate is crossing all limits. How can this offence be against the corporation?… You are totally violating the federal structure of the country.”
The ASG opposed the stay order, contending that the issue involved corruption of over Rs1,000 crore and asserted that the ED was not overstepping “at least in this case”.
CJI orally observed, “How can this offence be against the corporation? You may register cases against individuals. A criminal matter against the corporation? Your ED is crossing all limits. ED is totally violating the federal structure of the Constitution. Stay on the proceedings. When there are FIRs against officers, why is the ED intervening here? Where is the predicate offence? You (ED) must file an affidavit.”
Both the ruling DMK government and TASMAC have accused the ED of overreaching its powers and termed the raids held in March illegal. They had challenged the legality of the ED’s actions before the Madras High Court, which dismissed their plea. The High Court bench had noted that the allegations against TASMAC were serious and warranted a more in-depth investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Appearing for the Tamil Nadu government, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal told the court, “The state has filed 41 FIRs between 2014 and 2021 against individuals accused of taking bribes for the allotment of liquor outlets. These were criminal acts by individuals, not by the Corporation itself.”
The Supreme Court bench made these pointed remarks after hearing the Tamil Nadu government’s petition challenging the Madras High Court’s April 23 order, which had dismissed its and TASMAC’s plea against ED raids conducted between 6 and 8 April, including at the TASMAC headquarters.
Tamil Nadu BJP state secretary SG Suryah took to social media platform X and posted, “Just when Supreme Court Milords give an interim stay on #TASMAC enquiry, here’s news of a TASMAC employee attempting suicide, unable to collect the bribes & satisfy his bosses. SC Milords – Ponmudi conviction stayed, TASMAC corruption stay – ‘justice delayed is justice denied’.”
Just when Supreme Court Milords give an interim stay on #TASMAC enquiry here’s a news of a TASMAC employee attempting suicide unable to collect the bribes & satisfy his bosses.
SC Milords – Ponmudi conviction stayed, TASMAC corruption stay – “justice delayed is justice denied”! pic.twitter.com/uUZj4cSNnK
— Dr.SG Suryah (@SuryahSG) May 22, 2025
Cutting across party lines, several political leaders and legal observers have quietly questioned the Supreme Court’s interim stay on the Enforcement Directorate’s probe into the alleged irregularities in Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC). The perception in some quarters is that the stay appeared to have been granted primarily on the basis of arguments advanced by high-profile senior advocates engaged by the DMK-led Tamil Nadu government and TASMAC.
Concerns have been raised about how taxpayer money is being utilised to engage top legal names, especially when state-run entities are under scrutiny for serious charges like corruption.
Similar sentiments had surfaced earlier in the case involving a professor from Ashoka University, where questions were informally raised about how individuals without visible financial backing were able to secure legal representation from senior advocates known for their high fees runs into lakhs.
There is a sense among sections of the public and the legal community that politically sensitive cases—particularly those involving ruling parties or prominent opposition figures—often receive accelerated attention in court, unlike cases filed by ordinary citizens which tend to linger. These perceptions have given rise to quiet concerns over the balance and accessibility of justice, and the growing view that judicial processes may not always operate on an even field.
In this context, voices within the legal fraternity have begun calling for greater transparency and accountability in the higher judiciary. Some suggest that judicial reform is essential to ensure that public faith in institutions remains intact and that the legal system serves all sections of society equitably.
Some even quipped, “It’s not the Apex Court, but a Bail Court.” They warned that such trends and judicial over-activism without accountability will erode public faith in the judiciary. Judicial reform, they said, is the need of the hour to curb the unchecked conduct of certain judicial officers.
நேத்து ஒரு தீர்ப்பு திமுகவுக்கு எதிரா வந்த உடனே அந்த நீதிபதிகளை ஜாதிரீதியா விமர்சனம் பண்ணான் இப்போ ஒரு வழக்குல இடைக்காலத் தடைன்னு திமுகவுக்கு சாதகமா ஒரு தீர்ப்பு வந்ததால வரவேற்குறான் என்ன மானங்கெட்ட பிழைப்புடா பெயின்டரே உனக்கு…
— Pandidurai (@Pandidurai274) May 22, 2025
Netizens slammed the DMK, pointing out, “When the High Court stayed all 10 new Tamil Nadu laws regarding Vice-Chancellor appointments, DMK supporters and allies hurled casteist slurs at the judges, who happened to be Brahmins. But today, the same group hails the Supreme Court’s stay on the ED probe into the alleged TASMAC scam.”
Comments