Madras High Court orders re-transfer of Senthilbalaji case from special court to sessions court

Madras HC rules against transfer of money-laundering case against Minister to special court for MP/MLA cases. Court orders re-transfer of case to Principal Sessions Court designated by Centre in 2016. G.O. cannot override statutory provision empowering Centre to designate court for PMLA cases. Bail petition to be heard only by Principal Sessions Court.

The money-laundering case registered by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against Minister V. Senthilbalaji took another interesting turn on Monday, with the Madras High Court ruling against the recent transfer of the case from the Principal Sessions Court to a special court for MP/MLA cases on the basis of a 2019 State Government Order.

To get today’s top stories from the State in your inbox, subscribe to our Tamil Nadu Today newsletter

A Division Bench of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and K. Kumaresh Babu ordered the re-transfer of the case from the special court to the Principal Sessions Court, which had been designated by the Centre, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court in 2016, to hear all cases filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.

The orders were passed on a petition filed by the Minister seeking a clarification as to whether his bail petition should be heard by the Principal Sessions Court or the special court for cases against legislators. Senior Counsel N.R. Elango told the Bench that the Sessions Court had transferred the case bundle to the special court last month for trial.

Thereafter, the special court refused to entertain the Minister’s bail petition citing Section 43(1) of the PMLA, under which only the Centre, and not the State government, was empowered to designate the court empowered to hear PMLA cases. The Sessions Court, too, returned the bail petition on the ground that the case had already been transferred to the special court.

After perusing the 2019 G.O., which requires the transfer of all cases against legislators to special courts, the Division Bench said the G.O. could not override Section 43(1), a statutory provision under which only the Centre was empowered to designate a court, in consultation with the Chief Justice, to hear PMLA cases. The Centre had done so in 2016.