SC to hear T.N. Minister Periyasamy’s plea to defer corruption trial

The Supreme Court on April 5 agreed to list an application filed by Tamil Nadu Rural Development Minister I. Periyasamy to defer a corruption trial against him and exempt him from personal appearance.The Minister is accused of illegally allotting a High Income Group plot in the Mogappair Eri scheme of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption had lodged the case against Mr. Periyasamy in February 2012 when DMK lost the elections to the AIADMK.

The Supreme Court on April 5 agreed to list an application filed by Tamil Nadu Rural Development Minister I. Periyasamy to defer a corruption trial against him and exempt him from personal appearance.

During an oral mentioning, a Bench headed by Justice Hrishikesh Roy informed Mr. Periyasamy’s counsel, advocate Ram Sankar, that the application would be listed on Monday.

The Minister is accused of illegally allotting a High Income Group plot in the Mogappair Eri scheme of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The allotment was made to C. Ganesan, who was the personal security officer to then Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi, in 2008-2009. Mr. Periyasamy was at the time the Minister for Housing in the then DMK government. The Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption had lodged the case against Mr. Periyasamy in February 2012 when DMK lost the elections to the AIADMK.

The DMK again formed the government in Tamil Nadu in 2021. Mr. Periyasamy became a Minister. Two years later, in March 2023, a Special Court trying corruption cases against lawmakers discharged him in the case for want of proper sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

However, a Single Judge Bench of the Madras High Court of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh tooksuo motu cognisance of six cases of corruption. Mr. Periyasamy’s case was the first one. The High Court set aside the discharge order of the trial court and put the case back on trial.

In his application, the Minister said the High Court had no jurisdiction whatsoever to rekindle the case when there was no sanction for prosecution given by the Governor under Section 197.

“The Special Judge rightly discharged the petitioner (Periyasamy). The High Court erred in invoking suo motu powers of revision and erred in setting aside the well-reasoned judgment of the Special Court… It is the sanctity of a valid sanction which confers jurisdiction on the court and without the same, the prosecution is non est and the court lacks jurisdiction,” the Minister’s application said.