E-Paper
DMK minister Ponmudy convicted as High Court sets aside acquittal
Madras high court set aside a trial court’s order acquitting state’s higher education minister K Ponmudy in a ₹1.75-crore disproportionate assets case.
In a major setback for the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) government in Tamil Nadu, the Madras high court on Tuesday set aside a trial court’s order acquitting state’s higher education minister K Ponmudy and his wife in a ₹1.75-crore disproportionate assets case.
Justice G Jayachandran convicted the senior DMK leader and his wife P Visalakshi and directed them to be present in the court on December 21 for pronouncing the sentence after hearing them.
Read here: Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar on DMK MP's controversial remark: ‘Gone too far’
The case pertains to Ponmudy (72) amassing wealth disproportionately to the tune of ₹1.75 crore in his name and in the name of his wife which was 65.99% more than his known sources of income when he was a minister in the DMK-led regime during 2006 to 2011.
They were, however, acquitted by a trial court in Villupuram in 2016. On Tuesday, the high court set aside that verdict and noted that the charge of offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, stands proved against both accused.
“A complete miscarriage of justice had occurred by the omission of reliable evidence and by mis-interpretation of the evidence,” Justice Jayachandran noted. “…the overwhelming evidence against the respondents and the unsustainable reasons given by the trial court for acquittal by ignoring those evidence compel this court to declare the judgment of the trial court is palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous and demonstrably unsustainable. Hence, this is a fit case for the appellate court to interfere and set it aside.”
The judge also held the trial court wrong to consider the accused couple as separate entities instead of clubbing them together.
“The trial court has failed to understand that, the substance of charge against A-2 is that, she being the wife of A-1 (public servant) holding the assets of A-1 which he had acquired through unknown source,” the court held. “Whether, the lack of capital/source to yield income proportionate to the properties acquired in the name of A-2 during the check period is the point which ought to have been first examined by the trial court…”
For instance, the court found the trial court’s acceptance of the Income Tax returns filed by Visalakshi, the minister’s wife, without any independent evidence as “palpably wrong and manifestly erroneous.”
The trial court ought to have searched for supportive and independent evidence before accepting “the fanciful claim of agricultural income” to a tune of ₹55 lakh as against the estimated ₹13 lakh, the judge observed.
Earlier, the high court initiated a suo motu (on its own) revision case against the influential DMK leader and his wife. Justice N Anand Venkatesh, exercising the revisional jurisdiction of the high court — the power to revise cases decided by subordinate courts — on August 10 reopened the case. Subsequently, he reopened more cases involving politicians, including sitting ministers. Following a roster change, justice Jayachandran continued hearing these cases.
Last month, the Supreme Court had refused to entertain pleas filed by Ponmudi and his wife against justice Venkatesh for taking up the revision case. “Thank God we have judges like Justice Anand Venkatesh in our system,” a bench led by chief justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud had remarked on November 5.
Minister Ponmudi is likely to face disqualification, which will be clear following the sentencing by the court Thursday.
“If the conviction is more than two years he will lose his MLA post,” retired justice K Chandru said. “The disqualification is immediate upon sentencing, if it is not suspended.”
Read here: DMK MP Parthiban's suspension revoked, Centre explains why
If Ponmudi asks for suspension of the sentence for filing an appeal, then assembly speaker, M Appavu, might not disqualify him, the retired judge said, adding if he does not resign, governor RN Ravi might ask chief minister MK Stalin to drop him from the cabinet. Tuesday's order was passed based on an appeal filed by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption in 2017. On whether Ponmudy is disqualified with immediate effect under the Representation of People Act, even a senior counsel of the DMK, not wishing to be named, said: “He stands disqualified under section 8 (1) (m) of the Act."
There was no immediate reaction from the DMK on the minister’s conviction.
“An edifice built over a false ideology, made corruption its way of life & suppressed voices of dissent through muscle power is falling like a House of Cards today,” state BJP chief K Annamalai said on Ponmudi’s conviction.
