E-Paper
Senthil Balaji seeks SC relief from arrest after HC rejects pre-arrest bail
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) MLA and former Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji moved the Supreme Court on Thursday seeking protection from arrest in a corruption case concerning alleged irregularities in the functioning of the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC)
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) MLA and former Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji moved the Supreme Court on Thursday seeking protection from arrest in a corruption case concerning alleged irregularities in the functioning of the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC).
Balaji filed a Special Leave Petition just hours after his anticipatory bail application was rejected by the Madras high court, which held that allegations against him involved a “loss of over ₹17 crore to the public exchequer” and “required custodial interrogation.”
Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi mentioned Balaji’s SLP before a bench led by the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant seeking an urgent hearing.
The bench agreed to hear the plea on Friday, July 31.
Earlier in the day, a single bench of Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan refused to grant anticipatory bail to Balaji in the latest corruption case registered against him by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), after the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) government argued that the alleged ₹17-crore loss was only “the tip of the iceberg” and that the actual loss to the exchequer could exceed ₹100 crore.
State Public Prosecutor R John Sathyan had told the High Court that custodial interrogation was essential to unearth the full extent of the alleged irregularities.
DVAC had earlier this week, widened its probe into alleged corruption in TASMAC, carrying out searches at 41 locations across the state and registering a fresh FIR against Balaji and six others.
The FIR in the case, registered on July 28, names former TASMAC Managing Director S Visakan, former senior regional managers T Rama Durai Murugan and R Panneer Selvam, former ministerial aide Bhaskar, and private individuals Rathesh Raj Shanmugavel and S Karthik, besides Senthil Balaji. It also refers to unidentified public servants, transport contractors, bottling companies and distilleries.
According to the FIR, district and regional TASMAC officials manipulated tenders for bars and transport contracts, favoured selected bidders, enabled cartelisation among applicants and allowed bars to continue operating despite expired licences, causing substantial losses to the government.
The agency alleged irregularities in bar tenders across Coimbatore, Tiruppur, Erode, Namakkal, the Nilgiris and Karur, claiming that officials colluded with bar operators instead of raising fresh tenders wherever required.
The FIR also alleged that transport contracts for 45 TASMAC depots were manipulated by misusing earnest money deposit demand drafts submitted by one applicant. Investigators claimed that unused demand drafts were diverted to help other transport contractors secure contracts.
According to DVAC, tender procedures were deliberately bypassed through fraud, manipulation and illicit financial transactions.
The investigation has also focused on the operation of TASMAC bars. The FIR alleged that licences were often controlled by third parties rather than successful bidders through organised syndicates. It referred to a “Karur gang”, claiming that it exercised influence over bar allotments across the state and pressured TASMAC officials in the allocation of licences.
DVAC said the material collected so far disclosed a prima facie case of criminal conspiracy, criminal breach of trust, cheating and abuse of official position under provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Prevention of Corruption Act. It alleged that a nexus between political executives, senior TASMAC officials, private individuals and commercial entities manipulated decision-making within the corporation and caused significant loss to the public exchequer.
Senior Advocate NR Elango, who appeared for Balaji in the high court, argued that there was no specific material implicating him in the present case. He also pointed out that the Enforcement Directorate had previously conducted a search operation in the TASMAC office which was challenged before the high court, and later before the Supreme Court.
Elango argued that TASMAC was “an independent body” and that the former minister did not have a role in its tenders or functioning.
The state government had said that the DMK government tried to conceal the irregularities when it was in power and thus, the accused needed to face custodial interrogation.
“The previous regime tried to curtail all this. This needs elaborate custodial interrogation. Ample materials available. Huge amount of money involved and we don’t know to what extent it will go,” Sathyan told the high court.
