The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed petitions filed by Tamil Nadu Higher Education Minister K. Ponmudy and his wife, challenging suo motu proceedings initiated by Justice N. Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court against the transfer of their trial and subsequent acquittal in a disproportionate assets case.
The Minister’s lawyers were in for a surprise when Chief Justice Chandrachud, rather than ordering Justice Venkatesh’s recusal, hailed him for his judicial action.
“It is the correct order. Thank god for our judicial institution we have judges like Justice Anand Venkatesh,” the Chief Justice said, addressing senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi, who were appearing for the Minister and his wife, P. Visalatchi.
On August 10, Justice Venkatesh took suo motu cognisance of the transfer of the corruption trial against Mr. Ponmudy from the Villupuram District Judge to the Vellore District Judge on the basis of an order passed by the then Chief Justice of the Madras High Court on the administrative side. Justice Venkatesh had observed that the transfer of a criminal trial on the basis of an administrative order, and not a judicial one, was “ex-facie illegal and non-est in the eye of law”.
“The Chief Justice had transferred the trial from one district to another district. Where is that power? There is no administrative power to transfer a trial. It is a judicial power. The matter is placed before someone else and the trial hurriedly ends in acquittal,” Chief Justice Chandrachud observed.
Mr. Ponmudy has questioned the exercise of suo motu powers by Justice Venkatesh to review an acquittal.
Mr. Rohatgi said his client did not have anything to do with the transfer of the trial.
“But you are one of the Ministers who is an accused, right? And you are saying now that you had nothing to do with the transfer of the trial, is that not?” Chief Justice Chandrachud said.
Finally, the court, dismissing the appeals, said the petitioners could voice their grievances before the Single Judge Bench of Justice Venkatesh, who had already issued notice to them and the Additional Public Prosecutor in the trial.
The top court cleared the way for the Single Judge to decide the suo motu case and consider the objections of the petitioners on their own merits.
