Supreme Court granted bail to V. Senthil Balaji, former Transport Minister of Tamil Nadu, in PMLA case after his arrest by Enforcement Directorate 15 months back.

Judgment dated 26th September 2024

Cause title : V. Senthil Balaji Vs The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement

Case No: Criminal Appeal No. 4011 of 2024

Supreme Court of India

A Bench of Supreme Court Hon'ble Justice  Mr. Abhay S Oka and Hon'ble Justice Augustine George Masih granted bail to Mr. V. Senthil Balaji, former Transport Minister of Government of Tamil Nadu, under stringent conditions. He has spend 15 months in Jail after his arrest by Enforcement Directorate. Bail conditions as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme court are:

"a. The appellant shall furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty-five lakhs only) with two sureties in the like amount;

b. The appellant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to contact or communicate with the prosecution witnesses and victims of the three scheduled offences in any manner. If it is found that the appellant directly or indirectly made even an attempt to contact any prosecution witness or victim in the scheduled as well as offences under the PMLA, it will be a ground to cancel the bail granted to the appellant;

c. The appellant shall mark his attendance every Monday and Friday between 11 am and 12 noon in the office of the Deputy Director, the Directorate of Enforcement at Chennai. He shall also appear on the first Saturday of every calendar month before the investigating officers of the three scheduled offences;
d. Before the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall surrender his passport to the Special Court under the PMLA at Chennai;

e. The appellant shall regularly and punctually remain present before the Courts dealing with scheduled offences as well as the Special Court and shall cooperate with the Courts for early disposal of cases; and

f. If the appellant seeks adjournments on non-existing or frivolous grounds or creates hurdles in the early disposal of the cases mentioned above, the bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled."

 

Facts of the case are:

Between 2011 and 2016, the Mr. V. Senthil Balaji was holding the post of Transport Minister in the Government of Tamil Nadu. Broadly, the allegation against the him is that while discharging his duties as a Minister, in connivance with his personal assistant and his brother, he collected large amounts by promising job opportunities to several persons in various positions in the Transport Department. This led to the registering of three First Information Reports against Mr. V. Senthil Balaji and others. In the first FIR, six charge sheets have been filed. More than 2000 accused have been named in the charge sheets. 550 witnesses have been named. In the case of the second FIR, there are 14 accused named in the chargesheet. In connection with this FIR, 24 witnesses have been cited. In the third FIR, 24 accused have been named in the charge sheet and 50 prosecution witnesses have been cited. The offences alleged in the aforementioned crimes are mainly under Sections 120B, 419, 420, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7, 12, 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code has been invoked. These offences
are scheduled offences within the meaning of Section 2(y) of the PMLA. Therefore, relying on the final reports filed in aforementioned scheduled offences, for an offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA punishable under Section 4, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) registered an Enforcement Case Information Report bearing ECIR No. MDSZO/21/2021 on 29th July 2021.

The Mr. V. Senthil Balaji was arrested on 14th June 2023 in connection with the said ECIR and was remanded to judicial custody. A complaint was filed for the offence under Section 3 of the PMLA Act, which is punishable under Section 4, on 12th August 2023. The Mr. V. Senthil Balaji is the only accused named in the complaint. Cognizance has been taken based on the complaint by the Special Court under the PMLA. The scheduled offences cases have been transferred to the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Additional Special Court for Trial of Criminal Cases related to Elected Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu (Special MPMLA Court), Chennai.

 

 

Observation and Direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court:

"28. Some day, the courts, especially the Constitutional Courts, will have to take a call on a peculiar situation that arises in our justice delivery system. There are cases where clean acquittal is granted by the criminal courts to the accused after very long incarceration as an undertrial. When we say clean acquittal, we are excluding the cases where the witnesses have turned hostile or there is a bona fide defective investigation. In such cases of clean acquittal, crucial years in the life of the accused are lost. In a given case, it may amount to violation of rights of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution which may give rise to a claim for compensation.

29. As stated earlier, the appellant has been incarcerated for 15 months or more for the offence punishable under the PMLA. In the facts of the case, the trial of the scheduled offences and, consequently, the PMLA offence is not likely to be completed in three to four years or even more. If the appellant's detention is continued, it will amount to an infringement of his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India of speedy trial.

30. The decisions the learned SG relied upon indicate that the appellant's influential position in the State may have resulted in a so-called compromise between the bribe givers and the bribe takers. Considering the apprehension of the appellant tampering with the evidence, stringent conditions must be imposed.

31. Therefore, the appeal is allowed, and the appellant shall be enlarged on bail till the final disposal of CC No. 9 of 2023 pending before the Principal Session Judge, Chennai, on the following conditions:"
 

 

Download Judgment dated 26th September 2024 in V. Senthil Balaji Vs The Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Criminal Appeal No. 4011 of 2024.

 

Latest Supreme Court Judgments

Stamp Duty should be paid while registering Agreement to Sell which shows transfer of physical possession of property, Supreme Court, Appeal dismissed
Prosecution failed to place any evidence to prove suppression of material information, accused acquitted by the Supreme Court, in a case of holding a second passport
Supreme Court set aside the Judgment of High Court acquitting the accused who stored and watched child pornography on mobile phone.
Independent review by authority recommending and granting sanction are necessary aspects of compliance with Section 45 of the UAPA
Accused in a dowry death case acquitted by Supreme Court as necessary ingredients have not been proved beyond reasonable doubt .
Supreme Court granted bail Mr. Arvind Kejriwal in CBI case in connection with the alleged liquor excise policy case filed by CBI. Separate Judgment.
FIR against illegal sex determination test quashed by supreme court as there was nothing to connect the accused with the offence except search and seizure documents
Election Petition properly filed with particulars of corrupt practices require trial. Appeal against rejection of application under order VII Rule 11 dismissed by Supreme Court
High Court was not right in dismissing the writ petitions on the ground of delay and laches - Supreme Court
Resignation withdrawn before delayed acceptance. Supreme Court directed for reinstatement of employee.
Criminal Appeal allowed and detention order quashed by the Supreme Court on the ground of delay in deciding representation given by the accused to detaining authorities
Offer of Possession without completion certificate is not valid Supreme Court orders full refund of amount paid by consumer with 9% interest p.a. and Rs. 15 lakh compensation
Supreme Court orders complete and fair investigation by CBI into the death of Assistant District Prosecution Officer, Dantewada
Lawyer did not conduct proper cross-examination is no ground to recall witness under 311 CrPC, Supreme Court.

 

Supreme Court order dated 20.08.2024, in Kolkatta rape and murder case of doctor, to formulate protocols governing issues in the health care sector and protection of Doctors and Healthcare staff
Writ Petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking direction for ensuring protection for doctors and health care professionals, Improved working conditions and safety working environment