Madras High Court Sets Aside Discharge Of TN Minister I Periyasamy In Corruption Case

The case against Periyasamy was that while serving as the Minister for Housing in the DMK cabinet between 2008 and 2009, he had conspired with other persons to illegally obtain a High Income Group Plot in the Mogappair Eri Scheme of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board.

On Monday, Justice Anand Venkatesh allowed the suo moto revision taken up against the discharge of the Minister and thus set aside the trial court order. The court has ordered the trial to be transferred from the Special Court for cases under Prevention of Corruption Act to the Special Court for trial of cases against MPs and MLAs. 

The court has directed the transfer to be completed within a period of one month (by 26th March 2024) and has asked the Minister and another accused to be present in court on March 28 2024 and furnish a bond of Rs. 1 Lakh. The court has also asked the trial court to conduct trial on a day-to-day basis and send periodic reports to the Registrar General of the High Court. The court has also given liberty to the trial court to send the accused to judicial custody if they are found to resort to dilatory tactics.

Previously, Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing for Periyasamy had argued that the trial against Periyasamy was initiated upon a sanction from the Speaker of the House. He argued that this trial was non-est in law since the proper authority for granting sanction was the Governor.

Kumar also argued that while dismissing the first discharge petition, the trial court had noted that the arguments could not be accepted without hearing the Speaker. Kumar, therefore, argued that the second discharge petition which was filed after the commencement of trial and after examining the witness would still be maintainable in light of the trial court's earlier order.

The court, however, had questioned the DVAC's inaction in obtaining the sanction to prosecute, even after the trial court had discharged the Minister citing improper sanction. The court also went on to add that the issue involved a systematic problem that had to be solved.The court also remarked that the court should send a message to the public that it could take action even against people in the highest rank.