In a recent development that underscores the judiciary’s vigilance, the Supreme Court has commended Justice Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court for his suo motu order to reopen the acquittal of Tamil Nadu Minister K. Ponmudi and his wife in a disproportionate assets case. The apex court’s bench, led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, declined to interfere with the High Court’s decision, emphasizing the liberty of the petitioners to present their arguments at the High Court level.
Also read- Supreme Court Directs PFI To High Court For Challenge Against UAPA Ban (lawchakra.in)
The case, which has seen a series of contentious developments, came into the spotlight when Justice Venkatesh, in August, questioned the legality of the case’s transfer from the District Judge at Villupuram to Vellore. The transfer, ordered administratively by the Madras High Court in July 2022, was deemed “ex-facie illegal and non-est in the eye of law” by Justice Venkatesh, prompting a fresh hearing notice to the Prosecutor and the accused.
Chief Justice Chandrachud, during the Supreme Court proceedings, did not mince words, expressing his gratitude for judges like Anand Venkatesh.
“Thank God that we have judges like Anand Venkatesh in High Courts. Look at the conduct. The Chief Justice transfers the trial from one district to another district. Where is that power? There is no administrative power to transfer trial. It is a judicial power,”
he stated, highlighting the irregularities in the trial’s transfer and the subsequent acquittal.
The Chief Justice further noted that Justice Venkatesh was
“Absolutely right in his observations”
and that the matter was still pending before the High Court. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the minister and his wife, expressed concerns over the strong adverse observations made by Justice Venkatesh, suggesting that further hearing might be futile. However, CJI Chandrachud directed attention to the operative portion of the order, which simply issues notice to the prosecution and the accused.
Also read- Supreme Court Urges Governors To Act On Bills Without Judicial Prompt (lawchakra.in)
The bench, also comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, clarified that the accused’s objections would be considered on their own merits by the single bench, without any opinion from the Supreme Court.
Justice Venkatesh’s rigorous scrutiny did not end with Ponmudi’s case. He also initiated suo moto revisions against the acquittal and discharge of other prominent Tamil Nadu ministers and a former Chief Minister, reflecting his commitment to judicial integrity. Despite applications seeking his recusal and subsequent changes in his portfolio, Justice Venkatesh remained undeterred.
In a powerful statement, Justice Venkatesh had previously remarked on the peculiar haste in the trial proceedings, where a 226-page judgment acquitting the accused was penned within four days of the trial’s conclusion, followed by the retirement of the trial judge. He questioned the administrative approval of the case transfer, asserting that the Chief Justice does not possess the administrative power to transfer a criminal case between district courts.
The Supreme Court’s acknowledgment of Justice Venkatesh’s actions reaffirms the judiciary’s role as a guardian of legal propriety, setting a precedent for accountability and thoroughness in the justice system.
