The Madras High Court has issued a ruling against the release of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) minister V Senthil Balaji, who was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case last month. Justice CV Karthikeyan passed the ruling in response to a habeas corpus petition filed by Balaji's wife, seeking his release. The judge's decision aligns with the earlier opinion of Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy, stating that the ED has the right to seek custody of Balaji.
Justice Karthikeyan emphasized that if the arrest and remand are legal, the habeas corpus petition cannot be allowed. He further referred to a Supreme Court ruling in a similar case, highlighting the consequences of compromising justice, fair play, and the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence. The judge took into account the ED's contention that Balaji had refused to cooperate with the probe agency, threatened officials, and even refused to sign the memo of grounds of arrest.
The case against Balaji arose from alleged irregularities in the appointment of bus conductors, drivers, and junior engineers during his tenure as Transport Minister in the AIADMK government between 2011 and 2015. The minister was initially placed under judicial custody and later transferred to a private hospital for bypass surgery. Meanwhile, his wife filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his arrest.
The High Court division bench, consisting of Justices Nisha Banu and Bharatha Chakravarthy, previously delivered a split verdict on the maintainability of the habeas corpus petition and the powers of the ED to seek custody. Justice Banu held that the ED's arrest of the minister was illegal, while Justice Chakravarthy disagreed, stating that there was no illegality or misuse of the law in Balaji's arrest. The matter was then referred to Justice Karthikeyan for a final decision.
Justice Karthikeyan endorsed Justice Chakravarthy's view that the ED is entitled to seek custody of an accused person. While accepting the argument that ED officials are not police officers, he noted that the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) apply to proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The judge clarified that once an arrest is possible, seeking custody is permissible.
The ruling settles the conflicting views regarding the power of the ED to seek police custody and provides clarity on the matter. Justice Karthikeyan's decision supports the ED's authority to investigate and pursue custody in cases related to money laundering. The habeas corpus petition will now be placed before the Chief Justice's bench for further orders.
The legal proceedings surrounding Balaji's case have drawn attention to the alleged cash-for-jobs scam and the impact it has had on the victims. The judge acknowledged the plight of those who may have resorted to extreme measures, such as mortgaging their homes or selling jewellery, to secure government jobs through bribery. The objective of the PMLA, as outlined by the judge, is to determine the trail of funds and restore them to the victims while ensuring punishment for money laundering offences.
The final outcome of the case will be determined by the division bench of the Madras High Court, which will consider Justice Karthikeyan's opinion alongside the previous split verdict.
Source: Link
Picture Source :
