The court upheld that cognizance is taken of the offence rather than the offender, enabling supplementary complaints without violating prior hearing mandates, confirming no sanction under Section 197 of CrPC is needed for prosecution related to independent offences.

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.)

This is a petition presented under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS'). This petition seeks the following prayer:

“to call for the entire records pertaining to the impugned order dated 17.03.2025 passed in C.C.No.9 of 2023 pending on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, cum Special Court constituted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, Chennai, pertaining to taking cognizance of the supplementary complaint in the absence of sanction under Section 197 CrPC/218 of BNSS and without affording an opportunity of being heard before taking cognizance under Section 223(1)of the BNSS and set aside the same.”

Facts leading to the case

2.The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Engineer in the State Transport Corporation in 1987. Progressively, he secured promotion to several higher posts. In or about the year 2015, the petitioner was working as Deputy Manager in Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Chennai. During that time, recruitment process commenced for several posts like Reserve Crew Drivers, Reserve Crew Conductors, Junior Tradesmen (JTM), Junior Assistants (JA), Junior Engineers (JE) and Assistant Engineers (AE). The recruitment was for various transport corporations across the State of Tamil Nadu. Allegations were made, that the recruitment process was mired in illegalities and malpractices.

3.One, S.Devasahayam lodged a complaint before the Central Crime Branch, Chennai. An FIR was also registered in Crime No.441 of 2015 on 29.10.2015. The FIR invoked three Sections, namely, Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of IPC. Final report in C.C.No.3627 of 2017 was filed before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for CCB and CBCID (Metro) Cases, Chennai. As one of the accused happened to be a former Minister of the State of Tamil Nadu, the case was transferred to the Special Court for MP / MLA cases and re-numbered as

4.On further investigation, a final report was filed in C.C.No.24 of 2021, including the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The irregularities in recruitment process gave rise to two more complaints. One, FIR.No.298 of 2017 in C.C.No.4541 of 2018 under Sections 420, 506(i) read with Section 34 of IPC before CCB Court, Egmore. On transfer, the Special Court renumbered it as C.C.No.19 of 2020. The other complaint being FIR.No.344 of 2018, corresponding to C.C.No.8591 of 2019 under Sections 406, 409, 420, 506(i) read with 34 of IPC before CCB Court at Egmore and renumbered in C.C.No.25 of 2021, is pending on the file of the Special Court.

5.The petitioner is Accused No.7 (A7) in C.C.No.24 of 2021 and Accused No.23 (A23) in C.C.No.25 of 2021. In this petition, we need not go into the details of the aforesaid proceedings. They have been set forth in order to show that these were predicate offences, on the basis of which the respondent initiated proceedings under the provisions of The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'PMLA, 2002').

6.The respondent registered ECIR.No.MDSZO/21/2021 on 29.07.2021. On completion of the investigation, the respondent presented a complaint invoking Section 44(1)(b) and Section 45 of PMLA, 2002 against the former Minister, Thiru.V.Senthil Balaji alone, before the Principal Sessions Court at Chennai. The complaint was taken cognizance of by the learned Judge and numbered as C.C.No.9 of 2023. This took place on 12.08.2023. The Principal Sessions Court proceeded with the trial and P.W.1 to P.W.5 were examined. Examinati