Money laundering case against Senthilbalaji | Madras High Court grants four more months for completion of trial

Madras High Court grants four-month extension for money laundering trial completion against former Minister Senthilbalaji.

The Madras High Court on Wednesday, June 26, 2024, granted four more months for the Principal Sessions Court in Chennai to complete the trial in a money laundering case booked by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) against former Minister V. Senthilbalaji.

Justice G. Jayachandran granted the time since the Principal Sessions Judge S. Alli had expressed his inability to complete the trial within three months, as ordered by the court on February 28 this year, because of multiple petitions filed by the accused.

In a communication addressed to Registrar General M. Jothiraman, the sessions judge had stated that Justice N. Anand Venkatesh of the High Court had dismissed the former Minister’s bail plea in February and ordered completion of the trial within three months.

The High Court order was received by the sessions court on March 6, 2024 but in the meantime, the accused began filing multiple petitions seeking discharge and other relief and therefore the proceedings had to be adjourned from time to time, Ms. Alli said.

On the other hand, the counsel for the former Minister contended that the Supreme Court had on February 29, 2024 passed a verdict stating that the High Court should not fix time limit for completion of trials since the trial courts were overburdened with judicial work. He said, the Supreme Court’s verdict had come just a day after the High Court had fixed the three-month time limit for the completion of the trial in the money laundering case against the former Minister. He also opposed the sessions judge’s request for grant of four more months’ time.

The counsel told Justice Jayachandran that the High Court could, at the most, direct the sessions court to complete the trial as expeditiously as possible. However, the judge said, in such circumstances, the accused person must give an undertaking that he would not file any petition that could delay the trial.

“What do you want? Do you want to be in jail until the completion of trial? Will you give an undertaking that you will not seek bail or discharge until the trial is completed? The delay happens only because of repeated petitions filed on different grounds seeking the same relief,” the judge told the counsel.