ED already had a strong case against Balaji; Magistrate to decide on Balaji's custody in Delhi or in Chennai?

 

C Shivakumar @ CHENNAI:
Tamil Nadu Electricity Minister V Senthil Balaji arrested under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) after a long session of questioning will have to be produced before a judicial magistrate for taking into the custody of Enforcement Directorate once medical tests are favourable. It is not known whether he will be taken to New Delhi or kept in local custody.

It is learnt that based on the prima facie evidence, the statement of the minister was recorded after which he was arrested. While enforcement directorate was taking him to a magistrate to get his custody, the minister complained of a chest pain and he was taken into Omandurar Hospital.

Usually, there have been many high profile cases where in people complain of health issues. The investigating agencies ensure all such issues are cleared before taking the person into custody.

Such cases are usually helpful for the investigating agencies as this would help in denying bail to Balaji, sources said.  Usually, officials never allow ministers or others to meet the person involved in any offence after he is arrested. "Where is the right when he is arrested," sources said. "Only the family is allowed to visit him. Otherwise it will become a big tamasha," sources said.

While, it is not clear whether Balaji would be taken to New Delhi or may be taken into local custody. It is learnt that the magistrate will have to take a decision in this regard. It also depends on the importance of the case.

The arrest comes after a bench of the Supreme Court, on May 16, refused to discharge Balaji in the cash-for-jobs scam and set aside a 2022 Madras High Court order for a fresh investigation against the minister and others in the case. The high court order had the effect of nullifying a Supreme Court judgment of September 8, 2022, which had restored the criminal case against the minister. The Supreme Court has granted the state police two months’ time to complete the investigation and submit the final report. It also directed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to continue its probe into the charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The court had allowed the appeals filed by the ED and allowed the investigating agency to proceed further from the stage at which their hands were tied by the impugned order. "Once a piece of information relating to the acquisition of huge amount of illegal gratification in the matter of public employment has come into the public domain, it is the duty of the ED to register an information report," the court observed.

Under Balaji’s tenure as transport minister during the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) rule, recruitment for the post of reserve crew drivers, crew conductors, junior tradesmen (JTM), junior assistants (JA) and junior engineers was announced in November 2014. Aides of Balaji allegedly took cash from the aspirants for jobs in the Metropolitan Transport Corporation. While jobs were allegedly given to those who paid up, some were kept pending in view of the impending elections with the promise of accommodating them thereafter.

In 2016, following the death of then chief minister J. Jayalalithaa, Balaji moved out with the breakaway T.T.V. Dhinakaran faction. Distraught job aspirants stepped up the demand for return of their money. In 2018, four complaints were filed against Balaji and others, and an FIR was filed against them under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. The following year, the case was investigated and a charge-sheet filed before a special court for MPs and MLAs.

In 2021, Balaji approached the Madras High Court to quash the FIRs filed against him. He submitted that he had entered into a settlement with 13 aspirants, who were arrayed as witnesses in the case, and returned their money. Accepting it, the judge quashed the proceeding of the special court. However, the police and others challenged it and filed an appeal in the Madras High Court.

Meanwhile, the ED took cognisance of the case and registered four cases in connection with the scam, and named Balaji as an accused in of them. Further, the ED issued summons to Balaji and others for an inquiry. Challenging the summons, Balaji again approached the Madras High Court, contending that there were no jurisdictional facts for the ED to initiate any proceedings under the PMLA.

Allowing his petition, in September 2022, a bench of Justices T. Raja and K. Kumaresh Babu stayed the FIRs and quashed the summons issued by the ED. In swift retaliation, the ED challenged the high court’s order before the Supreme Court. In October last year, a Supreme Court bench, headed by then Justice S. Abdul Nazeer set aside the order of the high court and restored the criminal complaint against Balaji and others.

Meanwhile, the ED had completed its probe and had filed charge-sheets in all the cases. Challenging it, Balaji again approached the high court. On October 31, 2022, a single judge observed that there were irregularities in the investigation conducted by the ED and that it had overlooked certain crucial aspects. Further, the judge directed the ED to conduct a fresh investigation into two cases registered against the minister.

Challenging the single judge order for a fresh investigation, the ED filed an appeal before the Supreme Court. A few victims and Arappor Iyakkam, a NGO that campaigns against corruption, also filed an appeal challenging the Madras High Court order. While a few cases were listed before Justice Krishna Murari’s bench, other matters related to the cash-for-jobs cases were listed before the bench headed by Justice Ramasubramanian. Objecting to this, Balaji approached the Supreme Court, seeking an order for the cases to be heard by a single set of judges. Acting on this, Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud formed a special bench comprising both Justices Murari and Ramasubramanian. The special bench, which had reserved the order last month, heard the case on a daily basis and delivered its May 16 order.