NEW DELHI: A Supreme Court bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi on Monday refused to entertain ex-TN Minister V Senthil Balaji’s plea seeking expunction of remarks made by the court that forced him to resign as a minister.
In April, a bench comprising Justice AS Oka and Justice AG Masih had criticised Balaji for assuming charge as minister soon after he was granted bail in a money laundering case linked to the alleged cash-for-jobs scam.
The bench led by Justice Oka orally warned that Balaji’s bail will be cancelled if he did not resign. Choose between “post” and “freedom”, Justice Oka orally said, following which Balaji resigned. Taking note of the resignation, the court disposed of the applications seeking recall of the bail.
On Monday, the bench asked why the application was filed after the retirement of Justice Oka. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for ED, also remarked that the belated filing was not in “good taste” and the delay was “calculated”.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Balaji, said that the court’s oral remarks were not reflected in the order.
The bench, however, said the order was not an injunction against him becoming a minister, but a warning. “Court has not prevented you from becoming minister...but the day you become minister and we find you influence witness, we will recall the bail order...we can’t modify the order in piecemeal”, said Justice Kant.
“We don’t read the order as an injunction on you becoming a minister”, Justice Bagchi added. Sibal submitted that if it was actually found that Balaji was influencing witnesses, his bail can be cancelled. The bench pointed out there were in fact such allegations against him, and bail was granted only on the ground of long incarceration.
“This order should not be understood as a mandate that one cannot hold post while being prosecuted,” Sibal submitted. Balaji was arrested by the ED in June last year.
SC suggests transfer of case outside tn
New Delhi: In another matter related to Balaji, where victims have approached the Supreme Court seeking appointment of a special public prosecutor, the bench asked the TN government why these cash-for-job scam cases be not transferred to Delhi or some other neutral place.
Senior advocates Abhishek Singhvi and Amit Anand Tiwari, appearing for TN, opposed that suggestion saying that it will be a reflection on state judiciary that nothing is being done in these cases, and sought time to file responses. The bench took on record a chart of lawyers submitted by Gopal Sankaranarayanan, senior counsel appearing for the victims, for being appointed as special public prosecutors in the case.
It also asked TN counsels to submit some names who can be appointed as special public prosecutors. The top court was hearing a plea against the March 28 order of Madras HC dismissing pleas against the clubbing of multiple chargesheets in cases related to the alleged scam. On July 30, SC said a stadium will be needed to hold prosecution in the scam cases where over 2,000 people have been implicated.
