Supreme Court Refuses To Expunge Observations In Judgments Against Senthil Balaji; Clarifies They Shouldn't Influence Trial

In ex-Tamil Nadu Minister V Sethil Balaji's applications seeking expunction of certain remarks made in judgments related to the cash-for-jobs scam case, the Supreme Court today indicated that it would not change even a single word of the previous judgments in cases concerning him."We will not expunge anything, we will not touch a single word...We are not touching the judgment. We will only clarify that the observations shall have no bearing on the trial. That's a basic principle of criminal jurisprudence...Basic principles are always to be followed...there's no question of entertaining any review", said the Court.Although Balaji had moved the applications for expunction of remarks in 3 judgments, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Balaji, did not press the said relief and limited the former Minister's prayer to a clarification that the Court's observations shall not influence the trial Court.Considering such clarification to be a basic principle of criminal jurisprudence, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi passed an order stating that the observations made in the earlier judgment(s) shall not influence the trial Court."Though various prayers have been made in the miscellaneous applications, Mr Sibal (appearing for Balaji) restricts his prayers only to clarify the judgments dated...to the limited extent that the observations made therein shall have no bearing on the pending trials. He refers to a similar caveat put by this Court in the other case...consequently, applications are disposed of with a clarification that the observations shall have no bearing on the pending trial", the bench ordered.In a connected application (MA 1185/2025), it was indicated that the Court would first hear the parties on the issue of maintainability.Notably, during a recent hearing of the PMLA review batch, Justice Kant deprecated the practice of accused moving applications for modification of judgments after retirement of the judges who delivered them. The judge said that the practice was as bad as forum shopping and bench hunting, and hinted that Balaji's applications would be dismissed on this ground alone. For context, the topic of Balaji's plea for expunction came up during the hearing as reliance was placed on a judgment passed in his case to show the issues arising in the PMLA review batch.In that backdrop, Justice Kant today posed to Sibal that Balaji filed the miscellaneous applications after a gap of nearly 2 years and after both judges who delivered the judgments had retired. Ultimately however, as the prayer for expunction was not pressed, the bench disposed of the MA(s) recording necessary clarification.The 3 miscellaneous applications moved by Balaji pertained to the Court's observations (i) in its May 2023 judgment which allowed ED probe against Balaji and quashed the Madras High Court's order for fresh investigation; (ii) in the 2022 decision in P. Dharamaraj v. Shanmugam, which restored the criminal complaints against him over the alleged cash-for-jobs scam; and (iii) while refusing to cancel his bail in the money laundering case related to the 'cash-for-jobs' case.BackgroundIn 2018, a complaint was filed against Balaji and others for taking bribes from job aspirants on the false promise of appointing them to various posts in the Metro Transport Corporation (MTC). The former state minister, alongwith others, was booked for offences under Sections 406 (punishment for criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) of IPC. Subsequent to the lodging of an FIR in 2018, a charge sheet was filed.However, in 2021, the Madras High Court quashed the cheating case, after being told that the complainant and the thirteen alleged victims – arrayed as witnesses in the case – had arrived at a settlement with the accused. Two other FIRs filed in this connection were also stayed subsequently.When Balaji received ED summons in relation to the recruitment 'scam', he approached the High Court. The High Court quashed these summons in 2022. The same year, the Supreme Court passed judgment in the P. Dharamaraj case and restored criminal complaints against Senthil Balaji in relation to the 'scam'. Observing that there was evidence of corrupt practices to secure employment in the Transport Corporation during Balaji's tenure as Minister (2011-2015), the Court set aside the High Court order and said that serious offences like corruption could not be quashed merely on the basis of offer to refund.Two months later, the High Court ordered a fresh enquiry into the cash-for-job 'scam', observing that there were irregularities in the investigation conducted by the investigating agency. However, dealing with a batch of appeals in May, 2023, the Supreme Court allowed ED to carry out a probe against Balaji and quashed the High Court order for fresh investigation.In June 2023, Balaji was arrested in the money laundering case. He was granted bail by the Supreme Court in September 2024....

Supreme Court Refuses To Expunge Observations In Judgments Against Senthil Balaji; Clarifies They Shouldn't Influence Trial

Debby Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Debby Jain

Supreme Court Refuses To Expunge Observations In Judgments Against Senthil Balaji; Clarifies They Shouldn't Influence Trial

Debby Jain

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Debby Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers