Tamil Nadu ministers Ramachandran and Thennarasu to face trial in wealth case: HC

Chennai: Setting aside trial court orders discharging Tamil Nadu Revenue Minister KKSSR Ramachandran and Finance Minister Thangam Thenarasu from disproportionate assets cases, the Madras High Court on Wednesday directed the lower court to frame charges against them and proceed in accordance with law.

Passing an order on the criminal revision petition initiated by him, Justice N Anand Venkatesh set aside the orders of the Special Court for MPs and MLAs cases, Virudhunagar, dated July 20, 2023 and December 12, 2022 respectively, discharging Ramachandran and Thennarasu from the disproportionate wealth cases.

The ministers, both senior DMK leaders, have to face trial in the cases registered against them by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC).

As prima facie materials were available to frame charges, the Special Court shall proceed to frame charges and thereafter proceed in accordance with law.

The judge said that one of the most striking aspects of these two cases was the meticulous manner in which the DVAC officials have also colluded with each other to ensure that criminal trials against two sitting ministers were "quietly and indecently buried within the precincts of the Special Court." The judge directed Ramachandran to appear before the Special Court on September 9. Thennarasu has to appear before the Special Court on September 11.

The judge said as the case was of the year 2011 and 2012 respectively, the proceedings of the Special Court shall be conducted on a day-to-day basis keeping in mind the directives of the Supreme Court in Vinod Kumar vs State of Punjab, and dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible.

The judge made it clear "this Court has not examined or commented upon the merits of the case, which shall be decided by the Special Court on merits, without being influenced by any of the observations made herein above".

Narrating various principles, the judge said tested on the touchstone of the aforesaid principles, the conclusion was that the orders of the Special Court deserves to be set aside on the short ground that it had committed a manifest jurisdictional error in discharging the accused in the face of relevant material, the correctness of which could not be the subject matter for inquiry at the stage of discharge.

Additionally, the very fact that the Special Court has not assigned a shred of independent reasoning was another reason warranting interference in exercise of revisional powers, he added.

The judge said what was evident from the above was a clearly orchestrated plan. Once the two Ministers were back to power, the DVAC officials decided or were told by their higher ups to find ways and means to ensure that the prosecutions were 'torpedoed.' "The perfect plan was thus drawn up. When the three accused persons filed an ostensible written argument, the DVAC, with all sincerity, received them with open arms and then hunted for material to back up the defence of the accused, culminating with the "final closure report"," the judge added.

What was striking was that the so-called written argument, the intimation for further investigation and the final closure report were filed on the same day in both cases as was evident from the above. Unfortunately, the very same Special Court did not notice this and fell into or was willing to fall into an error in discharging the accused, the judge added.

He further said that after these illegalities came to the notice of this Court, it considers it a sacrosanct Constitutional duty to intervene on what it considers was a matter of principle to prevent the grossest abuse of the judicial process, which has resulted in the miscarriage of justice.

The judge said if the rule of law was to mean anything, it must mean that politicians and the common man of this state will be equal before the Courts and that the butcher, the baker and the candlelight maker will be treated just the same as a Revenue, Housing or Finance Minister of this State, the judge added.

According to prosecution, Ramachandran had amassed wealth in his name and that of his wife P Visalatchi besides his friend K S P Shanmugamoorthy, disproportionate to his known sources of income when he was the Minister for Health and Backward Classes between 2006 and 2011 during the previous DMK regime.

The prosecution case against Thangam Thenarasu was that he had accumulated assets in his name and that of his wife T Manimegalai, disproportionate to his known sources of income when he was the Minister for School Education between 2006 and 2011.