The Supreme Court, on Friday (September 6, 2024), stayed the operation of an August 9 judgment of the Madras High Court reviving the criminal prosecution of Tamil Nadu Ministers K.K.S.S.R. Ramachandran and Thangam Thenarasu in separate disproportionate assets cases.
A Bench headed by Justice Hrishikesh Roy froze the implementation of the judgment by the High Court’s Single Judge Bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh, which had invoked suo motu powers of revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to set aside a Special MP/MLA Court’s decision to accept the closure report submitted by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) and consequently discharge the two Ministers from all charges.
Justice Venkatesh had ordered the restoration of the cases against the DMK leaders in the Special Court.
The Single Judge had further directed the Special Court to treat the final closure report submitted by the DVAC on October 28, 2022 as a “supplementary” report filed under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure after conducting further investigation of the cases.
The High Court judge had directed the Special Court to go ahead a frame charges on the basis of the prima facie material available in this report.
The “accused” Ministers were also ordered to appear before the Special Court on September 9, following which trial proceedings would commence against them on a day-to-day basis, the August 7 judgment had said.
Justice Venkatesh had underscored the need for early conclusion of the trial while quoting James Jeffrey Roache’s poem “The net of law is spread so wide, no sinner from its sweep may hide… Big fish alone escape from thee!”
The appeal in the Supreme Court against the High Court saw a battery of lawyers, including senior advocates Kapil Sibal, AM Singhvi, Mukul Rohatgi, Siddharth Luthra, Tamil Nadu Advocate General PS Raman and advocate Ram Shanker appear.
Mr. Sibal submitted that the Single Judge went beyond the limits of its jurisdiction by directing the dismissal of the discharge of the Ministers from the case. The discharge order was arrived at by the Special Court in exercise of its jurisdiction after perusing the closure report, other materials, evidence and documents placed on record.
“In this judgment of August 7, the Single Judge has usurped the power of the Special Court,” Mr. Sibal contended.
Besides, he argued, the Single Judge could not have ordered the Special Court to frame charges. “That is for the prosecution to decide,” he stressed.
Mr. Sibal said the Special Court had considered ample material, including the October 2022 closure and 2012 report against the accused, to finally decide on the discharge of the Ministers from the case.
The senior lawyer said Single Judge’s suo motu criminal revision of the case was contrary to the Madras High Court Rules.
Published - September 06, 2024 03:16 pm IST
