CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Monday said it may not accept the clean chit report of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) against former local administration minister S P Velumani if it finds that ‘day has been turned into night’.
“Only if there are stark allegations for action to be taken will we interfere. If there are only small things, that does not interest the court. If the government has accepted the report, the court will not interfere but if day has been turned into night, then the court will not accept the same,” the first bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy said.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the former minister, said that once the state government has accepted the report of the DVAC, nothing else remains. A preliminary inquiry was conducted by a superintendent of police rank officer appointed by the high court.
Responding to the submission, the high court bench said: “It is the government which has accepted the report, the court might not have accepted the report…”
The issue pertains to a PIL moved by NGO Arappor Iyakkam to register an FIR and order a probe by a special investigating team (SIT) against Velumani over alleged corruption in allotting tenders of Chennai and Coimbatore corporations.
Representing the petitioner, advocate V Suresh submitted that the petitioner has filed a series of counters against the DVAC report. Since he wanted to make his submission in a physical hearing, the court adjourned the plea after four weeks.
On March 26, the court dismissed a plea moved by Velumani seeking contempt of court action against the NGO as an utterly frivolous petition.
Velumani has alleged that reports accusing him of corruption in awarding contracts of Chennai and Coimbatore corporations are being published continuously by the NGO on social media in violation of a court order.
According to the former minister, on October 18, 2019, a division bench of the court appointed superintendent of police Ponni attached to the DVAC to conduct a preliminary inquiry. Accordingly, the officer completed the inquiry and forwarded the report to the state government for further action, the petitioner said.
After due examination, on January 22, 2020, the state decided to drop further action in the matter based on the preliminary inquiry report and requested the division bench of the court to close the petition, he added.