Following a split verdict by the Madras High Court in a matter relating to Tamil Nadu Minister V Senthil Balaji, the Supreme Court on Tuesday refused the Enforcement Directorate’s plea to take upon itself the task of deciding two questions of law arising in the case – whether habeas corpus petition can be entertained after Balaji has already been rehabbed to judicial custody and can ED of denied its right of subjecting Balaji to interrogation for two weeks.
Not accepting a plea by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) urging the top court to take upon itself the task of decide ding two “neat” questions of law instead of letting the matter to go to the third judge following the split verdict, a bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta requested the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to place the matter before the third judge “at the earliest” and further requested the third judge (before whom the matter will now be placed) to decide the legal issues arising in the case “as early as possible.”
The bench kept pending the ED’s plea against the High Court order.
Telling the bench “I was apprehending the split verdict”, Solicitor General Mehta urged the bench to decide the question of law arising in the case instead of leaving the matter travelling to the third judge. He said that Senthil Balaji was an “influential” person and the “damage time will be irreversible.”
Posting the matter for hearting on July 24, the bench told the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who urged the bench to take upon itself and decide the two “neat” questions of law, Justice Surya Kant heading the bench said that they will like to have the benefit of the final opinion of the High Court on the issue.
A division bench of Madras High Court today (Tuesday) morning gave a split verdict.
Justice Nisha Banu held that the habeas corpus plea filed (by Balaji’s wife Megala) for Senthil Balaji’s release is maintainable and should be allowed. Justice Banu further said the ED is not entitled to get the custody of Senthil Balaji.
However, Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy said the habeas corpus plea was not maintainable after the remand order has been passed. He said that no case was made out to show that Balaji’s remand was illegal. Justice Chakaravarthy has also said that that period of Balaji’s stay at the hospital, should be excluded from the ED’s custody period.
In the last hearing of the ED’s petition on June 21, a vacation bench of the top court comprising of Justice Surya Kant and Justice M.M. Sundresh had refused to interfere with the high court order entertaining a habeas corpus petition against the arrest of Senthil Balaji in ‘cash for job scam’ and permitting his treatment and surgery at a private hospital.
Habeas Corpus petition was filed by Megala, wife of Senthil Balaji.
Senthil Balaji was arrested by the Directorate of Enforcement on June 14 in an alleged ‘cash for job’ scam that took place when he was the transport minister (2011-2015) in the government of late Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa.
The ED has arrested Senthil Balaji in connection with a money laundering case rooted in alleged ‘cash for job’ scam that took place when Senthil Balaji was a minister in AIADMK government who later crossed over to ruling DMK.
The high court had permitted Senthil Balaji to be shifted to a private hospital for a heart surgery and restricted his interrogation in the hospital. Senthil Balaji was operated for the blockages of three coronary arteries at a local private hospital in Chennai.