Madras High Court Quashes Case Against Electricity Minister Senthil Balaji In Job Recruitment Scam After Victims Enter Into A Settlement

The Madras High Court has quashed a 2018 cheating case against incumbent State Electricity Minister and DMK MLA Senthil Balaji filed in relation to allegations of a 2014 recruitment scam since all thirteen alleged victims had compromised the issue and wanted the case to be quashed. The case pertained to alleged irregularities in recruitment when Mr. Senthilbalaji was the Transport Minister in the AIADMK led government.

Justice M Nirmal Kumar proceeded to quash the case against the Minister, his brother Ashok Kumar, personal assistant Shanmugam and Metropolitan Transport Corporation (MTC) employee Rajkumar after the Court was apprised that the complainant and thirteen alleged victims of the recruitment scam had arrived at a settlement and had been repaid the money owed.

In the judgment delivered on July 30, but available in the public domain only now, the Court observed,

"The case is still at the stage of trial. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromised the dispute amicably among themselves. This Court enquired both the parties and is satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves. In view of the above, no useful purpose would be achieved by keeping the above case pending ... Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in this case, even though the offences involved are not compoundable in nature."

In August 2018, the FIR was lodged against the accused persons for offences under Sections 406 (punishment for criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Background

In the instant case, a 2018 complaint had been filed by K. Arulmani, a technical staff in the Metro Transport Corporation, Perambur alleging that he had been approached by Rajkumar (the fourth accused) in 2014 when a notification for the recruitment of driver and conductor in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation had been issued.

Rajkumar had allegedly informed Arulmani that such jobs could be secured in lieu of money. He had also claimed to know Senthil Balaji (then Transport Minister) and his brother Ashok. Rajkumar. On the basis of this assurance, Arulmani had proceeded to collect nearly Rs 40 lakhs from various persons. However, the names of the persons who had paid the amount had not been subsequently reflected in the recruitment list published.

As a result, Arulmani had approached Rajkumar seeking repayment of the money. Although two cheques to the tune of Rs 15 lakhs had been given, Arulmani later claimed that the cheques could not be uncashed due to insufficient balance. Thereafter, Arulmani was allegedly threatened against pressuring for repayment of the money, the complaint said.

Arulmani also alleged that he had taken four years to lodge the complaint because the accused was a State Minister and a Member of the Legislative Assembly. After the FIR was lodged in August 2018, a charge sheet had been filed in 2019. The trial in the instant case was pending before the Additional Special Court for trial of cases related to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu, Chennai.

It was also claimed that the petitioner was actually running a manpower agency and that the money was collected towards consultation charges for securing jobs if the applicants fulfil required eligibility. However, they were not eligible and hence they could not get the jobs. Furthermore, it was alleged that although the money had been repaid in 2019 and all 13 alleged victims were not interested in prosecuting the case, the police went ahead and filed a charge sheet due to political reasons. 

Justice Kumar noted that the alleged victims had deposed that they had been given the money owed to them and that they were not aware about events thereafter. Thus, the victims had no objection to the quashing of the case owing to the settlement. On the other hand, the counsel for the government contended that the State police was not aware of the 2019 compromise between the accused and the victims.

Terming the allegations to be 'general and vague' owing to the non production of the appointment orders and other documents in respect of the alleged transaction, the Court quashed the proceedings by observing, 

"In the light of the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2017 9 SCC 641 (Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath), and after exercising due caution as advised by the Hon'ble Suprme Court in The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ Crl 10, this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashes the proceedings in C.C.No.25 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Special Court for Trial of Cases related to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu, Chennai."

Case Title: Shanmugam v. The Inspector of Police and Anr

Click Here To Read/Download Order