Entrust Trial Of Corruption Case Against Senthil Balaji To Judge With Lesser Workload : Supreme Court Tells Madras HC

The Supreme Court on Monday (September 30) asked the Madras High Court to hand over the trial of the corruption case against Minister Senthil Balaji in the cash-for-jobs scam to a judge with a lesser work load.

Noting that the present Sessions Judge handing the cases against MPs/MLAs has a heavy caseload, the Supreme Court suggested that one more Sessions Judge be appointed to handle such cases and the trial of Senthil Balaji be handed over to the judge with a lesser load.

appoint a sessions judge to handle the trial of Tamil Nadu Minister Senthil Balaji and other accused in the cash-for-jobs corruption case citing the heavy workload on the current sessions judge handling cases related to MPs and MLAs.

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih highlighted that the case involves over 2,000 accused persons and around 600 prosecution witnesses. The Court emphasized the need for early disposal of the case due to the nature of the allegations in the charge sheet.

“The cases subject matter of this application have more than 2000 accused and about 600 prosecution witnesses. Looking to the allegations in the charge sheet these cases require early disposal. Considering the number of cases entrusted to learned special MP MLA court it will be appropriate that the High Court of Judicature at Madras appoints one more sessions judge to deal with the cases”, the Court stated.

The Court noted that the judge presently dealing with the matter is handling 29 other cases involving MPs and MLAs, with approximately 20 of those cases at the trial stage. In several of these cases, charges are yet to be framed.

The Supreme Court, considering the magnitude of the case, directed the HC to appoint another sessions judge. The Court also instructed that the new judge should not be overburdened with other cases.

"Needless to add that considering the magnitude of the case in terms of number of accused and number of witnesses, the case(Senthil Balaji case) will have to be entrusted to a learned sessions judge who is not already overburdened."

A copy of the order was forwarded to the Registrar General of the Madras High Court to place it before the Chief Justice of the High Court for necessary action. The Registrar General was asked to submit a report to the Supreme Court before the next hearing on October 25, 2023, detailing the steps taken on the administrative side.

Senior Advocates Gopal Sankarnarayanan and S Guru Kruishnakumar for the complainants raised concerns about Balaji's reappointment as a minister in the Tamil Nadu government after getting bail.

Senior Advocate S. Guru Krishnakumar said that the bail should be reconsidered as the bail was granted when Balaji was no longer a minister. He also sought the appointment of a judge to exclusively handle the trial related to Senthil Balaji.

However, Justice Oka observed that the Court had already noted the necessity of appointing a sessions judge who was not overburdened and remarked that this should suffice for the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to decide appropriately.

Senior Advocate Shekhar Naphade for the State of Tamil Nadu questioned the focus on Balaji, stating that there are other ministers with pending cases against them.

However, Justice Oka responded that the state's focus should be on giving priority to the trial of the case. He further suggested that the State should provide a list of pending cases against other ministers so that similar priority orders could be passed.

“So therefore, we suggest that on next date you point out how many cases are there against Ministers so we will ensure they are given out of turn priority. We are very serious about it. Please tell us how many cases are pending against the Ministers. Similar order we can pass”, he said.

Background

During Balaji's tenure as the transport minister in Tamil Nadu between 2011 and 2016, he along with his associates was accused of collecting money in exchange for job promises in the transport department. Multiple complaints were filed by job candidates who alleged that they paid money but did not secure employment.

Balaji faces charges under Section 420 (cheating) and other sections of the IPC and Sections 7, 12, and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Based on this, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) registered a money laundering case and arrested him in June 2023. Advocate Zoheb Hossain, representing the ED, has earlier submitted before the Supreme Court that of the three predicate offences against Balaji, one case involves over 2,000 accused individuals.

Earlier, the Madras High Court had denied Balaji bail. The High Court found no merit in Balaji's claims of evidence tampering, noting that the investigation was based on documents already present in the predicate offence, which were not challenged by Balaji.

Despite Balaji's argument that he was no longer a minister, the High Court noted that his continuation as a Minister without portfolio after his arrest indicated his significant influence. The Court observed that Balaji's influence could lead to the potential manipulation of witnesses, especially since there were earlier allegations of him attempting to compromise the predicate offence.

Aggrieved by the denial of bail, Balaji approached the Supreme Court, which granted him bail on the ground of delay in trial of the money laundering cases as well as the predicate offences.

During the bail hearings, the Supreme Court raised questions about the feasibility of proceeding with the PMLA trial without the completion of the trial in the predicate offence, which involves over two thousand accused.

Case no. – MA 1381/2024 in Crl.A. No. 1677/2023

Case Title – Y. Balaji v. Assistant Commissioner of Police Central Crime Branch (Job Racketing) And Anr.