PMLA can commence only if predicate offence is established, SC tells ED in Senthil Balaji case hearing
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) about the prospects of trial commencing in the money laundering case against former Tamil Nadu Minister V. Senthil Balaji without first establishing the predicate offence (cash for jobs).
“In the predicate offence, there are 1000 accused… When will the predicate offence be established? Unless the predicate offence is established, how will you (ED) commence trial proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act?” a Bench headed by Justice A.S. Oka asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED.
Mr. Mehta said he would address the issue in the due course of his submissions.
The Bench is hearing a plea for regular bail filed by Mr. Balaji, who said he had been in custody for over 300 days.
The Solicitor General said the victims of the cash-for-jobs scam were increasingly turning in favour of the accused. “He (Balaji) is winning over the victims,” Mr. Mehta submitted.
“But you will have to still address on whether there were any prospects of the PMLA trial commencing; if not, other considerations would come into play while dealing with the bail application,” the Bench weighed in.
The ED has accused Mr. Balaji of playing a “central and pivotal role” in the “job racket scam” during the period of 2014-2015. The case involves kickbacks for jobs in the Metropolitan Transport Corporation of Chennai and Tamil Nadu State Corporation when Mr. Balaji was the Transport Minister.
The Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) was based on three FIRs and a chargesheet filed by the Law Enforcement Agency of the Central Crime Branch of Chennai.
The ED had said bank statements show cash deposits of ₹1.34 crore in the account of Balaji and ₹29.55 lakh in that of S. Megala, his wife. Further, cash deposits of ₹13.13 crore were found with his brother Ashok Kumar, ₹53.89 lakh with his wife A. Nirmala, and ₹2.19 crore with B. Shanmugam, a private assistant of Mr. Balaji.
The ED had argued that the “huge cash deposits” detected to Mr. Balaji was “nothing but part of proceeds of crime brought into the financial system for the purpose of laundering. The proceeds of crime identified in his bank accounts were utilised and layered”.
Read Comments
- Copy link
- Telegram
READ LATER
Remove
SEE ALL
PRINT