The Supreme Court Yesterday (August 6th) adjourned hearing on the bail plea filed by former Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji till August 12 while asking the Enforcement Directorate (ED) probing the case whether trial against him in the money laundering case can go on without a conviction in the predicate offence probed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the cash-for-jobs scam.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday postponed the hearing on the bail plea filed by former Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji until August 12.
The court sought clarification from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on whether the trial against Balaji in the money laundering case could proceed without a conviction in the predicate offence, which is being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the cash-for-jobs scam.
Justice AS Oka, leading the bench, questioned,
“How can conviction in PMLA be sustained unless the predicate offence is established,”
and agreed to consider arguments on this aspect on Monday. Balaji is accused in a 2014 cash-for-jobs scam, where he allegedly took bribes for providing jobs in the state metropolitan transport corporation (MTC). He was the Transport Minister during the AIADMK-led government.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the ED along with advocate Zoheb Hossain, argued that the trials for the predicate offence and the offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) could proceed simultaneously.
The bench, which also included Justice PB Varale, further stated,
“You also need to address if there is possibility of trial concluding soon in the predicate offence. There are more than 1,000 witnesses.”
This observation is significant as Balaji had approached the Supreme Court against the Madras High Court’s order from February 28, which denied him bail. He was arrested on June 14 of the previous year. According to the ED, proceeds of crime amounting to Rs 67.74 crore have been identified, implicating Balaji in the PMLA case.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Balaji, argued that the former minister had been in custody for over a year and that the charge sheet had been filed in the cases against him.
Balaji also sought bail on medical grounds, claiming that he had undergone coronary bypass surgery and required medical attention. He questioned the evidence presented against him, suggesting that the materials included in the charge sheet were not recovered from his residence. The ED disputed this claim.
The High Court, while denying bail to Balaji, observed,
“The fact that the petitioner continued to hold the position as a minister for nearly eight months and that too without a portfolio when he was inside the jail, shows the tremendous influence of the petitioner and the importance that is given to him by the state government.”
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Senthil Balaji
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
