NEW DELHI: In a major relief to Tamil Nadu minister and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) general secretary Durai Murugan, the Supreme Court on Wednesday in its order stayed the trial-court proceedings against him in a disproportionate-assets case.
"There shall be no further proceedings until the next date of hearing (in this case). Issue notice returnable on April 20," said the two-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan.
It stayed the trial court proceedings after hearing an appeal filed by Murugan, challenging an order of the Madras High Court, holding that the materials placed by the prosecution disclosed a prima facie case against him.
During the hearing on Wednesday, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi sought a stay on the trial in the DA case, pleading that the accused, Murugan had been granted similar relief in another case involving a different period of time.
"Murugan is 87 years old and recently suffered a hip fracture. Thereby this court should consider all these factors into mind and pass appropriate orders," he contended before the apex court.
Upon hearing these submissions, the Court granted interim stay till the next date of hearing in the matter.
Primarily, in the first round of litigation, a Special Court in its order discharged Murugan in the case citing lack of evidence.
Following which, the State moved the HC challenging the Special Court's order discharging Murugan.
The HC had then set aside the discharge order of the Special Court and directed it to frame charges and proceed with the trial. Since the case pertains to the check period between 1996 and 2001, the Court directed that the trial be completed within six months from the date of its order.
Challenging this order, Murugan had filed an appeal in the top court.
According to the prosecution, the case relates to the allegations that Murugan, while serving as Minister for Public Works and Forest Department between 1996 and 2001, acquired properties in his name and his wife and son's too. The State filed a chargesheet against him for offences under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.