New Delhi, Apr 28 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Monday disposed of applications seeking the cancellation of bail granted to Senthil Balaji in the money laundering case linked to the ‘cash-for-jobs’ scam, after taking note of his resignation as Tamil Nadu Minister.
A witness in the case had alleged that Balaji was misusing his official position to influence the trial, prompting an application seeking cancellation of his bail. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had also moved a similar plea seeking recall of his bail order. Both applications were closed by the court today.
Last week, the Supreme Court had cautioned Balaji that he must choose between his "position" and "freedom," warning that his bail would be revoked if he continued as Minister.
Following this stern warning, Balaji tendered his resignation late on April 27.
During today's hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED, requested the Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and A.G. Masih to impose a condition barring Balaji from returning to ministerial office while the matter remains pending.
Mehta pointed out that in the case of Arvind Kejriwal, similar conditions were imposed. Without such a restriction, he argued, Balaji could reclaim a ministerial role shortly, especially with Justice Oka set to retire on May 24, which could, he said, make the judiciary and investigative agencies a "laughing stock."
Justice Oka, however, suggested that if Balaji were to re-assume office, a fresh application for cancellation of bail could be filed.
Mehta stressed that Balaji wielded considerable clout over the State Government, noting that even while incarcerated, Balaji had continued as a Minister without a portfolio. He expressed concern that Balaji’s influence could stall the prosecution in the predicate offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The Top Court held that since Balaji had already resigned, there was no need to proceed with the applications.
The SG also urged the Court to direct speedy disposal of the predicate case, alleging deliberate delays caused by Balaji.
However, this claim was refuted by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Balaji. The Bench refrained from passing any directive regarding expeditious trial proceedings.
The matter traces back to April 23, when the Supreme Court warned Balaji that his bail would be revoked if he failed to resign from his ministerial position. He was given time until April 28 to make a decision, which led to his resignation yesterday.
At the previous hearing, the Court had expressed strong disapproval of Balaji being re-inducted as a Minister shortly after securing bail, especially given prior findings that he had coerced individuals into withdrawing complaints and had played a central role in the predicate offence.
Justice Oka emphasized that bail was granted not based on the merits of the case but solely due to concerns over prolonged incarceration and delay in trial, thereby invoking Article 21 rights.
The Judge also expressed apprehension about the political misuse of the liberal bail standards recently articulated by the Supreme Court in money laundering cases, noting that Balaji’s swift return to office undermined the Court's intentions.
In September 2024, despite finding a prima facie case against Balaji, the Supreme Court granted him bail, citing his long detention since June 2023 and the improbability of an early trial. The Court underscored that speedy trial requirements must be factored into special laws imposing stringent bail conditions.
Balaji subsequently took oath as a Cabinet Minister in the Tamil Nadu government on September 29, 2024, under Chief Minister MK Stalin’s leadership.
On December 2, 2024, the Supreme Court voiced surprise over Balaji's reinstatement as a Minister post-bail, but refused to recall the bail order.
Instead, the Court limited its review to examining whether Balaji’s continued political position was
exerting pressure on witnesses.
The ED, in an affidavit filed on December 13, noted that Balaji was reinstated as Minister for Electricity, Prohibition, and Excise within 48 hours of his release.
It also pointed out that during his eight-month incarceration, he remained a Minister without portfolio, resigning only a day before his bail plea was heard by the High Court.
The affidavit raised concerns over Balaji’s influence over witnesses, many of whom were public servants who had served under him as Transport Minister.
The ED also cited instances of trial delays post his release, including the prolonged cross-examination of a forensic expert.
On December 20, the Supreme Court directed the Tamil Nadu government to provide detailed information regarding the pending cases against Balaji, the number of witnesses involved, and to distinguish between public servants and private individuals among them.
The Court expressed particular worry over the possibility of intimidation of victims and key witnesses.
Thus, with Balaji’s resignation now on record, the Court closed the pending applications without imposing further conditions but left open the possibility of future action should circumstances change.
UNI SNG CS