Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan also directed DVAC not to take any coercive action against Velu till July 28 and directed the department to file its counter in a plea filed by him for quashing the FIR and subsequent LOC.

DVAC had registered an FIR against the former Minister and others on June 25, 2026, based on a complaint filed by the NGO Arappor Iyakkam in 2022, alleging that money was paid to a contractor before work began. It was alleged that there was corruption in the allotment of funds for road infrastructure projects.

The State Government accorded sanction to prosecute Velu on June 23, 2025, following which the FIR was registered.

DVAC claimed that there was prima facie material showing that the accused persons (including Velu) had entered into a criminal conspiracy and had caused losses to the exchequer.

The case is registered under Sections 120B, 420, 409, 468, and 471 of the IPC, along with Sections 7(c), 13(2) read with 13(1)(a), and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In the meantime, Velu had gone to Singapore for medical treatment. Following this, a lookout circular was issued against him.

When the matter quashing petition came up for hearing on Thursday, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra (appearing for Velu) argued that no valid sanction was obtained before prosecuting Velu, as required under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

"Law is clear. If there is a legal bar, you can't touch the matter. You can't proceed. Today, there is a legal bar and you can't proceed without the governor's approval," Luthra argued.

It was also argued that it was not a case where the road was not laid at all. He submitted that the road was laid on a later date.

Senior Advocate P Wilson (also appearing for Velu) argued that the cases were registered following a regime change, and the LOC was issued without any credible material showing its necessity or proportionality. He argued that the condition precedent for issuing an LOC did not exist in the present case. It was submitted that the summons to appear was issued on June 30. However, on June 26th itself, Velu had gone to Singapore for medical treatment.

Wilson argued that Velu had to remain in Singapore till July 12 and was willing to appear before DVAC for enquiry after July 12. He also alleged that the case is being pursued because of regime change, as the case was registered only in 2026, even though the complaint was made in 2022.

"There's a regime vengeance I would say. Unnecessarily they want to parade me. I'm 76 year old heart patient," Wilson argued.

Countering the submissions, Public Prosecutor John Sathyan, argued that there was sufficient material to show that payments for the contracts were made even when the work was not carried out.

After hearing the parties, the court was inclined to stay the circular on the condition that Velu appears before the agency on July 15th and asked the authorities not to precipitate the issue of securing Velu till July 28.

Case Title: EV Velu v The State of Tamil Nadu and EV Velu v Union of India

Case No: Crl OP 17964 of 2026 and WP Crl 1626 of 2026