Supreme Court Stays CBI Investigation Against Ex-Tamil Nadu Minister KT Rajenthra Bhalaji In Corruption Case

The Supreme Court today(Monday) passed an interim order restraining the Central Bureau of Investigation from conducting investigation into the allegations against former AIADMK Minister K.T. Rajenthra Bhalaji in a cash-for-job scam case.

On January 6, the Madras High Court directed CBI's probe after it found that the Tamil Nadu Government had not complied with the Court's earlier order passed in November last year, directing the State police to file a chargesheet in this matter.

Today, before a bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N Bhatti, two special leave petitions challenging the order was heard. Appearing for the State, Senior Advocate Amit Anand Tiwari argued that the State police had filed a chargesheet, contrary to what was argued before the High Court that no chargesheet had been filed.

He informed that subsequently, a sanction under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act was sought and the investigation began. Therefore, now, a sanction application under Section 19 of the PC Act is pending before the Tamil Nadu Governor. He added that the Governor has asked for translated documents, which is taking some time. Tiwari argued that the HC order would lead to a de novo investigation.

Whereas, Senior Advocate V Giri, for Rajenthrabhalaji, submitted that the investigation to CBI cannot be transferred as a matter of routine as it lacks any cogent reasons. He stated that the order was passed in a petition without hearing parties. He added that an order passed by the subordinate bench of the High Court rejecting the transfer of investigation was not disclosed before the Court.

Against this, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, for the complainant, alleged that State is trying to protect the former minister. He said: "State is protecting this ex-minister."

Justice Mithal however orally questioned the locus standi of Luthra's client. He said: "Today, you are no one before us."

However, an order was passed directing the intervention application filed by Luthra to be put on record.

Looking at the High Court's order, Justice Bhatti orally stated that there is a three-judge bench's judgment which sets out when a matter can be transferred to the CBI. He asked: "Whether this is a fit case for transfer [to CBI or not] nothing [mentioned in the order?]"

He said this in the context of the High Court's order which lacks any explanation as to why the investigation has been transferred to CBI except that the State failed to comply with the Court's order.

Considering the circumstances, the Court ordered the Governor to decide the Section 19 PC Act sanction and stayed the impugned order of the High Court.

 It ordered: "In the impugned order dated 6-1-2025, the High Court has directed for the transfer of the investigation, criminal case no.19/21, to the CBI only for the reason that the chargesheet was not filed within the time allowed. An affidavit has been filed by the Principal Secretary to the Governor, Tamil Nadu, pursuant to our last order dated 7 March 2025. The affidavit states that steps are being taken with regards to sanction for prosecution under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. However, the Secretariat of the Governor noticed that certain documents were in Tamil and requires English translation.

Therefore, the Secretariat has directed for the English translation of the FIR 19/21 and 20/21...It has been submitted that upon receipt of translated copies of above documents, the file shall again be submitted to the Governor for purpose of sanction. In view, we permit the State of Tamil Nadu to submit the translated copies to the Secretariat of the Governor within 2 weeks. Thereupon, it is expected that the office of the Governor would take a decision on the sanction forthwith. We issue notice to the Respondents...In the meanwhile, we direct that the CBI will not proceed with the investigation."

Case Details: K.T. RAJENTHRABHALAJI Vs THE STATE|D No. 9403/2025 and THE STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE v S RAVINDRAN|SLP(Crl) No. 3186/2025

Petition in Bhalaji's case filed through AOR A Velan