The case concerns over 40 FIRs filed between 2017 and 2024 based on complaints involving Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), a government-run liquor company. These FIRs cite serious irregularities, including financial fraud and tender manipulation.
Chennai, May 22, 2025 — The Advocate General (AG) of Tamil Nadu, PS Raman, has assured the Madras High Court that he will advise the State government not to close over 40 FIRs (First Information Reports) related to the TASMAC scam, at least for the time being.
ALSO READ: Madras High Court: “TASMAC Claims ED Crossed Jurisdiction Boundaries, Violating PMLA”
This assurance came while the court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a CBI investigation into the alleged Rs.1,000 crore TASMAC scam.
The case concerns over 40 FIRs filed between 2017 and 2024 based on complaints involving Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC), a government-run liquor company. These FIRs cite serious irregularities, including financial fraud and tender manipulation.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has recently initiated a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), based on these FIRs, treating them as predicate offences.
During the hearing before the Vacation Bench of Justices GR Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan, AG PS Raman requested an adjournment and informed the Court that not all necessary parties had been added to the petition.
Raman pointed out that the accused persons named in the FIRs had not been impleaded. He said these individuals have a right to be heard before any decision is made to transfer the case from the Department of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) to the CBI.
ALSO READ: Madras High Court Urges Tamil Nadu Government to Cooperate with ED in TASMAC Probe
The Bench was willing to adjourn the matter without passing any interim order but expressed concern that the PIL could become meaningless if the FIRs were closed in the meantime.
“Pavana Dibbur case clearly says, if the predicate offence goes, PMLA prosecution also goes … Can you undertake not to close predicate offence? We will not pass any interim order. But what if the State closes all predicate offences? PMLA will go … This writ petition will become infructuous if you close predicate offences tomorrow,” the Bench observed.
To this, AG Raman gave his assurance:
“If we have to close it, we can’t close it by ourselves. We will have to file a closure report before the jurisdictional magistrate, we can’t close it unilaterally… Lordship may take it (some other day) … Lordships may not record it, but I will advice the State accordingly (not to close any case) … I will tell the Home Ministry not to do anything.”
When the Bench remarked that the State appeared to be aligned with TASMAC, AG Raman clarified:
“The State is not trying to protect TASMAC.”
He added that the State’s opposition to the ED probe was rooted in protecting the federal structure of the Constitution, not in shielding TASMAC.
“Even in other hearings, the State had opposed the ED’s probe in the TASMAC case only to protect federalism.”
The Madras High Court officially recorded the AG’s submission and adjourned the matter for three weeks, allowing time for the petitioner to add all necessary parties. The Court reiterated that if the FIRs (predicate offences) are closed, then the PMLA case and the request for a CBI probe would also fall apart.
“To enable the petitioner to cure the defect, the case stands adjourned by three weeks. Since the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that if predicate offences are closed, PMLA prosecution cannot survive, we called on AG to make a statement that predicate offence will not be closed. He informed that he will definitely advice Home Secretary not to close pending predicate offences till next hearing date. Adjourned by three weeks.”
Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu appeared for the petitioner, K Venkatachalapathy.
Just an hour after the Madras High Court hearing, the Supreme Court of India stayed the ED’s money laundering probe in the TASMAC case. This stay came after the Tamil Nadu government challenged an earlier High Court order that had allowed the ED to proceed with its investigation.
ALSO READ: Tamil Nadu Withdraws Supreme Court Plea to Transfer ED-TASMAC Case
During the hearing, the top court reportedly made a critical observation:
The ED appeared to be “crossing all limits” and “violating the federal structure of Constitution” by initiating a probe into TASMAC.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
