Very Difficult To Get Corruption Cases Registered Against Powerful Men In This Country: Madras High Court Remarks

Justice Anand Venkatesh made the oral observations while hearing a contempt petition filed by NGO Arappor Ayakkam against the delay in proceedings against former Minister SP Velumani and three IAS officers in a tender irregularities case.

“How difficult it is to register corruption cases against powerful people in this country? A judge sitting in this court is trying and trying. If there were no public-spirited persons or judges, there would not be any corruption cases against anyone in this country. Everyone will be a holy cow,” the court remarked.

SP Velumani is accused of abusing his official position while he was serving as the Minister for Municipal Administration. It is alleged that he had extended large-scale favouritism while awarding tenders for road works in Chennai Corporation and Coimbatore Municipal Corporation to his relatives and his close associates.

Arappor Iyakkam, an NGO, made a complaint with the DVAC. A preliminary enquiry was conducted and the DVAC was accorded sanction to register a regular FIR. Thus, an FIR was registered for offences under Sections 120B read with Section 420 and 409 of IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(c) and Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

When some of the companies approached the High Court to quash the FIR against them, the court had refused the same and directed the DVAC to file the final report before the concerned jurisdictional court after getting a necessary sanction order against the public servants. Since this direction was not complied with, the NGO approached the court with a contempt petition.

In the previous hearings, the DVAC had informed the court that the orders had been complied with and a final report had been filed. It was, however, submitted that sanctions were yet to be obtained for prosecuting two IAS officers.

The court was, however, not inclined to accept the explanation. It noted that since the case involved alleged corruption between 2014 and 2018, the DVAC should have dealt with the case with alacrity and brought it to a conclusion at the earliest.

The court had criticised the DVAC for the delay on its part in obtaining sanction from the Union Government to prosecute two IAS officers in connection with a case. The court added that the cases against former ministers, IAS officers, etc., had to be dealt with in an expeditious manner to bring public faith in the system. The court also called for an explanation for the delay.

In later hearings, the court was informed that the sanction sought for the two IAS officers was still pending in New Delhi since November 2025. The court was also informed that the Union Government had sought clarifications, which were provided by February 14, 2026 but since then, the files were pending.

When a clarification was sought from the Secretary to Government, Public (SC) Department, it was informed that the concerned officers had requested to be heard in person. It was submitted that though the department wanted to ascertain issues from the Greater Chennai Corporation, the municipal administration was engaged in election work, due to which further delay occurred.

The court had then impleaded the Secretary to Government, Department of Personnel and Training to the contempt petition and sought response on the stage of consideration of the file.

Following this, when the case was again taken up today, the counsel sought further time to get clarification on the delay. This urged the court to make the comments. The court added that the society had reached such a point that corruption did not agitate individuals anymore.

“I think we've reached a point where Indians are not much agitated about corruption. On the one hand we're saying we're against corruption. And on another all this is happening. What are they doing with the files? Isn't there a time limit for dealing with files against corruption?” the court asked.

The court thus impleaded the Under Secretary in the Union Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension and sought a status report regarding the proposal for sanction for prosecuting the two IAS officers.

Case Title: Arappor Iyakkam v S Vimala IPS

Case No: Cont P 2012 of 2025