E-Paper
Supreme Court seeks ED reply on plea by Senthil on Madras high court ruling
A bench of justices AS Bopanna and MM Sundresh issued notice on the two petitions challenging a split verdict given by the high court on July 4.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday sought the response of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on a petition filed by Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji and his wife Megala challenging an order passed by the Madras high court that allowed the federal agency to take Balaji into custody in connection with a cash-for-job scam.
A bench of justices AS Bopanna and MM Sundresh issued notice on the two petitions challenging a split verdict given by the high court on July 4, following which the matter went to a third judge who ruled on July 14 that ED was entitled to take the minister into custody, and that the period spent by the minister in hospital would not be counted as part of the custody. The third judge also held that the writ petition of habeas corpus filed by the wife was not maintainable as the minister was arrested on June 14, and remanded to ED custody by a judicial order.
Also Read | Senthil Balaji's arrest by ED, judicial custody legal: Madras High Court
The third judge ,justice CV Karthikeyan, sided with the view taken by justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy who in his July 4 decision dismissed the petitions and found no flaw with ED custody. Justice Karthikeyan, however, referred the matter to the same bench to pass the necessary orders on the period of custody. The other judge in the case, who ruled against ED custody, was justice Nisha Banu.
ED challenged the custody period part of justice Karthikeyan’s verdict, in a separate appeal, which the top court on Friday agreed to hear along with Balaji and Meghala’s appeals. ED was represented by solicitor general (SG) Tushar Mehta, who said that once the third judge agreed with the conclusion that period undergone during hospitalisation is to be excluded from the 15-day custody, he should have handed over the custody of the minister to ED. Mehta said that he was not supposed to refer the matter back to the same bench.
“Delay in taking custody is hampering effective investigation of the case. Thousands of people have paid money to this individual,” he added.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the minister, sought orders restricting ED from taking his custody till this matter was decided. “Nothing will happen till the next date. The third judge has directed the matter to be placed before the earlier division bench,” the bench responded.
Balaji, who is currently a minister in the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) government in Tamil Nadu, was arrested on charges of accepting bribes while serving as transport minister in the pervious AIADMK-led government from people seeking jobs in the state transport department between 2011 and 2015. On May 16, the Supreme Court allowed ED to proceed with the investigation against him, leading to his arrest on June 14.
Soon after his arrest, Balaji was hospitalised and underwent a bypass surgery.
In his petition before the top court, Balaji said that since ED is not a police force, it may have power to investigate and arrest, but not to keep a person in custody. According to him, the high court erred by allowing ED custody beyond the mandated 15-day period under Section 167 of the criminal procedure code (CrPC).
“When the statute itself does not contemplate custody with police after 15 days of the initial arrest, courts cannot provide for the same, as it would amount to entering in the field of legislature,” Balaji stated in his petition. “Since the very arrest and remand order were both illegal and contrary to law, the impugned judgments upholding the same are liable to be set aside.”
The bench posted matter for hearing on July 26.
