Govt Job Offer Scam: Madras High Court Reserves Order In Former Minister Rajenthra Bhalaji's Plea For Anticipatory Bail

The Madras High Court has reserved orders on the two anticipatory bail applications in cases registered against former AIADMK Minister Rajenthra Balaji for swindling money from the public by promising government jobs. On Tuesday, Justice M. Nirmal Kumar heard all the parties at length before reserving the orders. The counsel for the applicant minister, Ajmal Khan, argued that the offences alleged to have been committed by his client arises out of the same transaction, and hence the police shouldn't have registered two separate FIRs against the Minister. He also submitted that the proceedings so far evoke suspicion on the case made out by the prosecution, and hence his client is entitled to anticipatory bail. He submitted that three complaints were given by the de facto complainant, S. Raveendran, before an FIR was registered on 15th November, which is an enlarged version of the initial complaints made.On the last occasion, the court had given an oral direction to the police not to arrest the former Minister till the next date of hearing. Virudhanagar District Crime Branch had registered a cheating case under Section 420 IPC against the former minister and his personal assistants. The first complainant, one of the alleged victims, Mr S Raveendran accused K Nallathambi of collecting Rs 30 lakhs from him, whom he says he met via Mariappan, another AIADMK member. S. Raveendran's case is that his nephew was promised a job as the manager in Aavin (state diary board); he handed over the money to Nallathambi after he met with the then Milk & Dairy Development Minister Rajenthra Bhalaji. On the same day at 5 pm, K Vijaya Nallathambi, allegedly a close aid of Bhalaji, filed a separate complaint with the police alleging that he has been made a tool to further the ulterior motives of the Minister. Subsequent to these cases, Bhalaji filed anticipatory bail applications before Madras High Court, arguing that both cheating cases have been politically motivated and solely meant to tarnish his reputation. K. Nallathambi alleged in his complaint that the public paid crores of rupees to him and the amount so collected was given to Bhalaji's personal assistants for securing government jobs. The FIRs book the for Minister for offences including criminal breach of trust, criminal intimidation and cheating. K.Nallathambi and S. Raveendran also state in their respective complaints that Bhalaji has failed to repay the amount so collected by the former and given to his assistants. ArgumentsFor Former Minister K.T Rajenthra Bhalaji Advocate Ajmal Khan argued that the charges levelled against the former Minister in Crime No. 19/ 2021(based on a complaint by Raveendran) and Crime No. 20/ 2021 (based on a complaint by the aide, K Vijaya Nallathambi) arise out of independent transactions. The registration of the second FIR on the alleged commission of cognisable offences is illegal. The complaint filed by Raveendran can be construed as the original complaint since Raveendran was the first informer, said the counsel. The second complaint could have been at the most admitted as a statement under Section 161 (3) CrPC or under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act in case discovery of new facts were involved. He relied on the apex court judgment in T.T Anthony v. State of Kerala, 2001 6 SCC 181 to argue that an officer in charge must proceed based on the first information report, and if he gets any further information about the offences committed pursuant to the same, there is no requirement to file a fresh FIR. He also relied on Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah v. CBI & Anr, 2013 6 SCC 348 commonly known as the Sohrabuddin Fake Encounter case, to suggest that when the subsequent offences alleged to have been committed is a part of the preliminary cognisable offence, no second FIR can be registered. In Sohrabuddin's case, a second FIR filed and a fresh charge sheet against Amit Shah over the murder of the eye witness Tulsiram Prajapati was quashed by Supreme Court citing the same reason. The counsel also drew the court's attention to the registration of multiple FIRs by police during the anti-sterlite protests in 2018. The Madras High Court had then directed the police to quash the large number of cases registered on the basis of same incident. As many as 244 cases were registered by the Police during the protests. For anticipatory bail, Khan also contended that there is no proximity between the defacto complainant Raveendran and Rajenthra Bhalaji. It was only in his revised complaint on 15th November that he mentions about him meeting with the then Minister, which is clearly an improved version of the original complaint, submitted Advocate Khan. The counsel, then turning to K Vijaya Nallthambi, requested the court to ignore the complaint made by the latter, citing the allegedly dubious character and the criminal cases pending against the second ...

Govt Job Offer Scam: Madras High Court Reserves Order In Former Minister Rajenthra Bhalaji's Plea For Anticipatory Bail

Sebin James

Tags