E-Paper
Top court suggests transferring Senthil Balaji’s trial out of TN
The Supreme Court denied former minister V Senthil Balaji's plea to clarify his prosecution wouldn't bar him from power, emphasizing trial fairness.
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain an application moved by former Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji to clarify that the prosecution against him in the cash-for-jobs case should not be a bar on his occupying a position of power.
The application filed by Balaji sought expunging of remarks made by the top court on April 28, 2025, while deciding a plea seeking recall of the bail granted to the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader on September 26, 2024. The plea alleged that within two days of getting bail, Balaji became a minister in the state cabinet and this gave rise to a genuine apprehension of witnesses being influenced and the trial derailed. After the court took a tough stand and offered Balaji to choose his freedom or the post, the DMK leader resigned leading to the court’s April 28 order.
Terming the former minister’s application “misconceived”, a bench of justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi on Monday said, “This court took serious exception to your becoming minister two days after you were granted bail on September 26, 2024. The purpose was that till you get a clean acquittal you should not hold any public office.”
The court clarified that it has not prevented Balaji from becoming a minister. “But, the day you become a minister and we find that you are indulging in influencing witnesses, then we will recall the bail order,” it said.
During the hearing, senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the DMK leader said, “There cannot be an order by the court that when there is a pending prosecution, I cannot hold a position of power….If he comes to power and if witnesses are influenced, they (state) are entitled to move application for cancellation of bail.”
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) which is carrying out parallel probe against Balaji on the same set of allegations, said that the April 28 order and the September 2024 judgment granting bail was passed by a bench presided over by justice AS Oka, who retired in May this year. “After justice Oka’s retirement, this application is filed. This is not in good taste.”
He further pointed out that justice Oka had told Balaji to either choose to remain out on bail or continue being a minister by going to jail.
The bench told Sibal that it cannot modify the April 28 order “in a piecemeal fashion”. “The court is only disclosing its mind what weighed with it for granting bail. And this order is by the very same bench which granted you bail. It is better you do not press this application.”
Mehta also told the court that the state is not doing anything to ensure the trial in the case ends soon. “It is sad that nothing is being done by the local police probing the case,” he said. The victim in the case –– K Vidhya Kumar, represented by senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan and advocate Pranav Sachdeva –– said that more than 2,500 people have been named as accused to delay trial.
To ensure a fair trial, the court suggested shifting the trial outside Tamil Nadu. “Why cannot the trial be transferred to Delhi. The witnesses can depose online.”
The court allowed the state to take instructions in this regard indicating that the transfer will be by everybody’s consent. The court also asked the state to respond to two separate petitions moved by the victim Kumar challenging the clubbing of separate cases related to the scam and for appointment of a special prosecutor.
The allegations against Balaji involve alleged irregularities that took place in recruitments in the state’s transport department between 2011 and 2015, when he was the transport minister in the then AIADMK-led government. The case is being probed by the state police.
Balaji was arrested by the ED for alleged money laundering charges in June 2023 in which case he was released on bail in September 2024. Presently, the trial in both the cases –– PMLA case and the predicate offence, is proceeding separately against Balaji before a special court hearing cases related to MP/MLAs.
