‘We grant bail and the next day you become minister’: Supreme Court to Senthil Balaji
Expressing concern over the appointment of DMK leader V Senthil Balaji as minister in the Tamil Nadu government days after it granted him bail in a money laundering case linked to the cash-for-job scam, the Supreme Court on Monday agreed to examine a plea raising apprehensions on independence of witnesses in the case.
“We grant bail and the next day you go and become Minister! Anybody will be bound to be under the impression that now with your position as a senior Cabinet Minister, witnesses will be under pressure. What is going on...,” a bench of Justice AS Oka and Justice AG Masih asked senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who represented Balaji.
While hearing a petition filed by one of the complainants seeking cancellation of bail granted to Balaji, the bench, however, refused to interfere with its September 26 order enlarging the DMK leader on bail.
Balaji was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate on June 14, 2023 in a money laundering case.
Noting that it would only examine if witnesses were under pressure, the bench asked Balaji’s counsel to get instructions on the issue and posted the matter for further hearing on December 13.
“The present application is based on apprehension. The apprehension is based on the fact that immediately after we enlarged the second respondent on bail by the judgment and order dated September 26, the second respondent has been appointed as a Cabinet Minister of the state. The apprehension is that considering the seriousness of the allegations against the second respondent in the predicate offences, the witnesses may not be in the frame of mind to depose against the second respondent who is now holding the position of a Cabinet Minister.
“This is the only aspect on which, prima facie, we are inclined to consider the application. We make it clear that as there is no reason to interfere with the view taken on merits in the order dated September 26, the adjudication of this application shall remain confined to the aforesaid aspect only,” the bench noted in its order.
