Today, On 14th November, In the Cash for Jobs Scam, The Supreme Court has issued a notice on V Senthil Balaji’s plea to relax the strict bail conditions, while the ED has opposed any dilution of the terms, arguing that the existing restrictions are necessary for the ongoing probe.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court issued a notice on Friday regarding a petition from former Tamil Nadu Minister V Senthil Balaji, who is seeking to modify the strict bail conditions established in September 2024 related to a money laundering case initiated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi agreed to review Balaji’s request to ease the mandatory appearance requirements from the previous order, specifically clauses 31(c) and 31(e).
Under these conditions, Balaji was mandated to appear before the ED every Monday and Friday, meet with the Investigating Officer concerning the predicate offense on the first Saturday of each month, and attend all hearings at the trial court.
During the hearing, Advocate Zoheb Hossain represented the ED, while Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal advocated for Balaji. Sibal informed the Court that Balaji has adhered to all requirements for over 13 months, resulting in 178 appearances before various authorities.
His petition contends that with the PMLA trial now underway, the cases related to the predicate offenses are still at the summons stage, rendering the frequency of appearances “unreasonable” and “onerous.”
Sibal argued that the original conditions aimed to facilitate a smooth investigation and prevent delays, but that rationale is no longer valid since the ED has completed its inquiry and the trial has commenced. Balaji further claimed that the constant travel for mandatory appearances has become excessive, hindering his ability to effectively defend himself during the trial.
The Court issued a notice to the Enforcement Directorate, seeking its response on the possibility of relaxing the conditions given the current stage of proceedings and Balaji’s compliance history. This matter will be addressed after the agency submits its reply.
Earlier, in September 2024, the Supreme Court granted bail to Balaji in the money laundering case.
A division bench of Justices Abhay Oka and Augustine George Masih had reserved its verdict in August after questioning the ED about the next steps in cases where the trial was not progressing.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Advocate Zoheb Hossain represented the ED, with Hossain stating that Balaji was the primary accused in three predicate offenses. He noted that even if the trial in one specific case does not proceed, the PMLA trial could continue based on the other two predicate offenses.
Balaji is challenging a February decision from the Madras High Court that dismissed his bail plea, as that Court had ruled on the merits and instructed the trial court to conduct daily proceedings and conclude them within three months.
Earlier, in August 2023, another division bench of the Supreme Court rejected appeals from Balaji and his wife Megala, contesting an order that granted ED custody in a money laundering case.
Allegedly, while serving as Transport Minister in Jayalalithaa’s Cabinet from 2011 to 2015, Balaji was involved in a job racket that solicited bribes for positions in the Metropolitan Transport Corporation. It is claimed that he collected money from third parties under the pretense of securing jobs in the Transport Department, subsequently defrauding them.
The ED arrested Balaji on June 14 last year, remanding him to judicial custody for 14 days. After reporting chest pain, he was admitted to the Tamil Nadu Government Multi Super Specialty Hospital at Omandurar Estate in Chennai for a medical evaluation, where doctors recommended CABG-bypass surgery as soon as possible.
Also Read: Senthil Balaji Appears Before Local Court
That same day, his wife filed a petition with the high court, alleging that his arrest was executed without due procedure and requested his transfer to a private hospital for treatment.
The high court later denied him interim bail but permitted his transfer to a private facility in Chennai for medical care.
Case Title: V Senthil Balaji v. The Deputy Director