Alleged offences
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
Suo Motu RC – Appellant
Versus
State rep.by The Inspector of Police The Vigilance & Anti-Corruption PS Virudhunagar – Respondent
Crl.R.C.No. 1481 of 2023
Decided On : 23-08-2023
Criminal Revision - MP/MLA Cases - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) - Summary of Acts and Sections
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the discharge of the accused, who were political personages of the ruling party in the State, by the Special Court for MP/MLA Cases. The accused were alleged to have amassed assets far in excess of their known sources of income during their tenure as Ministers.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found a well-orchestrated pattern of delay and manipulation in the case, leading to the discharge of the accused. The Court criticized the Special Court for MP/MLA Cases for accepting a 'closure report' and discharging the accused, despite the irregularities and manipulation in the investigation process.
Issues: The issues included the legality of the 'further investigation' conducted by the investigation officer, the acceptance of the 'final closure report' by the Special Court, and the failure of the stakeholders to uphold their duties in the criminal justice system.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the 'further investigation' conducted by the investigation officer was not permissible under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. The Special Court's acceptance of the 'final closure report' and discharge of the accused was illegal and resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
Final Decision: The Court exercised its revisional powers suo motu under Article 227 of the Constitution and Sections 397/401 Cr. P.C. It issued directions for the Additional Public Prosecutor to take notice on behalf of the State and for the accused to appear for a hearing.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Revision case filed under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. to call for the records on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilluputtur (Designated Special Court for MPs and MLAs) passed in Spl.Case.No.20 of 2019, dt.12.12.2022 and set aside the same.)
As the judge holding the portfolio for MP/MLA cases in the State, two orders of the Special Court for MP/MLA Cases (Principal Sessions Judge), Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur discharging the accused, who were political personages of the ruling party in the State, were placed before me for scrutiny. Special Case No 19 of 2019 was a case involving the incumbent Minister for Revenue and Disaster Management Mr.K.K.S.S.R. Ramachandran, his wife Adhilakshmi and another. The second was Special Case No.20 of 2019 involving the incumbent Electricity Minister Mr.Thangam Thennarasu and his wife T. Manimegalai. In the former case, the accused were discharged by an order dated 20.07.2023 and in the latter case the accused were discharged by an order dated 12.12.2022.
2. It was a deja vu moment for this Court as both orders revealed a wellorchestrated pattern: the Special Court had taken cognizance of the final reports in 2013/14. Discharge applications were filed, and the cases were adjourned for months and years on end till 2021. In 2021, the political fortunes in the State smiled at the main accused who regained their positions as Ministers in the State Cabinet. A few months thereafter the State prosecution very magnanimously came forward and offered to conduct “further investigation”. The product of this “further investigation” was a “closure report” tailored to support the grounds for discharge. The Special Court was then presented with a perfect fiat accompli as the prosecution suddenly whitewashed its earlier final report and presented a picture of complete innocence. On its part, the Special Court accepted the closure report and proceeded to discharge the accused.
3. This Court smelt a rat and called for the entire records of these two cases. "Something is rotten in the State of Denmark", said Shakespeare in Hamlet. On examining the records, this Courtis of the considered opinion that something is very rotten in the Special Court for MP/MLA Cases at Srivilluputhur.
4. This order deals with the case of Mr.Thangam Thennarasu and his wife Manimegalai who were arrayed as A1 and A2 in Special Case No.20 of 2019 before the Special Court for MP/MLA Cases (Principal Sessions Judge), Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur.
5. Mr.Thangam Thennarasu @ T. Thennarasu was elected to the Tamil Nadu State Legislative Assembly from the Arupukottai constituency in May 2006. Between 13th May 2006 and 14th May 2011, he was a member of the State Cabinet of the DMK holding the portfolio as the Minister for School Education. He was re-elected on a DMK ticket from the Tiruchuli constituency in 2011, 2016 and 2021 respectively.
6. The case of the prosecution is that during the check period (15.05.2006 and 31.03.2010) Mr.Thennarasu, the then Education Minister, and his wife Manimegalai had amassed assets which were far in excess of their known sources of income. On 14.02.2012, a case in Crime No 3 of 2012 was registered by the DVAC, Virudhunagar alleging the commission of the following offences.
| Rank of the accused | Alleged offences |
| T. Thennarasu (A1) | Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. |
| Manimegalai (A2) | Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 109 IPC. |
In the course of investigation, the investigation officer Mr.S.Swaminathan examined 93 witnesses and collected 101 documents and filed an exhaustive final report before the Special Court for Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Madurai on 15.11.2012. In the meantime, sanction for
AI
The Court emphasized the duty of the High Court to prevent miscarriage of justice and to correct irregularities in the criminal justice system, and held that the Special Court's actions resulted in a....
Judicial interventions are essential when procedural illegality and political machinations undermine the administration of justice, particularly in corruption cases.
The court ruled that a second discharge petition after trial commencement is not maintainable, emphasizing the Speaker's authority to grant sanction for prosecution of MLAs under the Prevention of Co....
The Magistrate has the power to direct further investigation under Section 173(8) of the CrPC, and such powers can be exercised suo moto as well.
The judgment emphasized the importance of providing reasoning in judicial orders and the impact of such orders on the investigating agency and accused persons.
Point of law : In exercising powers under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the settled position of law is that the Judge while considering the question of framing the charges under the ....
Delay in filing a final report under the SC/ST Act, if duly explained, does not invalidate proceedings, especially in cases involving severe offenses like murder or conspiracy.
The trial judge is expected to exercise judicial mind to determine whether a case for trial has been made out, and the duty of the trial court to apply its mind at the time of framing charges and not....
(1) Further investigation – Mere fact that there may be further delay in concluding trial should not stand in way of further investigation if that would help court in arriving at truth and do real an....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.