High courts are “robust institutions” that must be trusted to decide cases in accordance with law, the Supreme Court observed on Wednesday as it turned down the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) plea to pass any order at this stage regarding the custodial interrogation of arrested Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji.
While ED implored the top court to issue an order that the period of Balaji’s stay in hospital for a heart surgery should be excluded from the 15-day period of custodial interrogation, the Court said that the federal agency should go back to the Madras high court, where the case is coming up on Thursday, to raise all its contentions in first instance.
“As of now, we have no reason to doubt the ability of the high court and that it will not appreciate the correct position in law... High courts are very robust institutions. They are also constitutional courts. We are fully confident that the high court is competent to decide as per the correct proposition of law,” a bench of justices Surya Kant and MM Sundresh told solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who appeared for ED.
Also Read:Tamil Nadu minister Balaji undergoes bypass surgery week after ED arrested him
{{/usCountry}}Also Read:Tamil Nadu minister Balaji undergoes bypass surgery week after ED arrested him
{{/usCountry}}ED had moved the top court on Monday seeking custodial interrogation of Balaji after his discharge from hospital and a direction that the period of Balaji’s stay in hospital would not be set off against the period of ED remand.
On Wednesday morning, Balaji underwent a coronary artery bypass at Chennai’s Kauvery Hospital.
In a brief statement the hospital said, “Balaji underwent beating heart coronary artery bypass surgery... four bypass grafts were placed, and coronary revascularisation was established.”
Mehta, on Wednesday, pointed out that the high court has created a wrong precedent by entertaining a habeas corpus petition filed by Balaji’s wife challenging the minister’s arrest by ED on June 14.
“They have not only entertained the petition but also issued some orders for shifting him to a private hospital etc. The high court had to necessarily decide first whether a habeas corpus petition can ever be maintainable against an order of arrest and an order of remand by a court,” Mehta argued.
The bench, however, responded that the high court, in its order on June 15, had itself set about to examine whether a habeas corpus petition can be maintainable and therefore, there is no reason to prevent the high court from deciding the issue, especially when the matter is listed on Thursday (June 22).
“Will any order by us not prevent the high court from rendering a judgment after considering everything? Nobody can deprive you of your right to get the remand of a person whose bail has been declined. It’s only a question of timing. The only question is that whether the remand should wait until the person who is undergoing some treatment is fit to be interrogated. We are confident that the high court will consider everything and pass an order,” the bench told the S-G.
Mehta repeatedly requested the Court to record in its order that the period of 15 days – the maximum that the law provides to an investigating agency for custodial interrogation, shall not trigger during the hospitalisation of Balaji.
But the bench retorted, “Today is not the stage to say it. To say it will mean we don’t trust our own institutions... Wait for that situation to come. You have made out a case and we will examine it. We are keeping your petitions pending here. Whichever way the high court decides, one or the other side will approach this Court and we can then decide it.”
Senior counsel NK Kaul, representing Balaji and his wife, argued that the minister was undergoing surgery at this point of time and that it is unfortunate on the part of ED to claim that he feigned illness. “He has undergone coronary artery bypass at a hospital today. He cannot create fake blockages in his heart,” Kaul contended.
In its order, the bench recorded that since the high court is yet to render its final opinion regarding the maintainability of habeas Corpus petition and the exclusion of the period of treatment undergone by Balaji from the period of custodial interrogation, the petitions filed by ED stands adjourned to July 4.
“We request the high court to proceed with the matter on merits. It is clarified that the pendency of the petitions before this Court shall not be taken as a ground to adjourn the hearing before the high court.
The observations made by the high court, or any oral observations made by this Court during the proceedings shall have no bearing on the merits of the case,” stated the Court order.
The Tamil Nadu Electricity and Prohibition and Excise minister was arrested by ED on June 14 under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in an alleged cash-for-jobs scam against him when he was the transport minister in the earlier AIADMK cabinet led by late J Jayalalithaa. His arrest sparked a furious political row between Tamil Nadu’s ruling DMK and its rivals - the All India Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and its ally, the Bharatiya Janata Party, over the alleged misuse of federal agencies.
ED has filed two petitions in the top court. The first petition is against the June 15 high court order that allowed the shifting of the minister, arrested by ED under money laundering charges, from a city government hospital to a private facility of his choice following his wife filed a habeas corpus petition.
The second petition challenges the Chennai sessions court order of June 16, restricting ED’s interrogation at the hospital after obtaining permission from the team of doctors treating Balaji.
“Therefore, it is respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass an order permitting
ED custody after the accused is discharged from hospital,” ED pleaded. It further sought an order that since Balaji got hospitalised from the first day of remand, he is to be deemed not under any effective custody so that the first 15 days custody period does not come in the way of right of the investigation agency for effective investigation and interrogation.