The Supreme Court on Monday declined to intervene in the Madras High Court’s order that issued notices to DMK minister K Ponmudy and his wife in a criminal revision case following their acquittal in a disproportionate wealth case by a Vellore trial court.
A bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra praised Madras High Court Judge Justice N Anand Venkatesh for taking suo motu notice of the matter.
“Thank God, we have judges like Justice Anand. Look at the conduct. The Chief Justice transfers the trial from one district to another. Where is the power of the Chief Justice to transfer the trial from one district judge to another on the administrative side? It has to be judicial order. The HC single judge is right in examining this,” the bench stated.
The Supreme Court stated that the single judge is currently handling the matter, having only issued notices to the parties. Therefore, it is not inclined to entertain the pleas at this stage. Arguments from senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Mukul Rohatgi, representing the accused and the state, respectively, were not entertained, with the court suggesting that all arguments can be presented before the single judge who issued the notices.
On August 10, the Madras High Court ordered notice to Ponmudy and his wife under section 397 of the Cr.PC. Justice Venkatesh initiated the criminal revision case himself and ordered notices to the Tamil Nadu government. He scheduled further hearings for September 7, 2023.
The case against Ponmudy was that he had amassed wealth of Rs 1.4 crore in his name, his wife’s, and friends’ names, which was disproportionate to his known sources of income when he served as a minister between 1996 and 2001.
Justice Venkatesh noted that the case started moving swiftly in June 2023, with a defense witness examined on June 6, written submissions made on June 23, and a 226-page judgment acquitting all the accused delivered on June 28, just days before the Principal District Judge, Vellore, retired.
The judge criticized the process of transferring the case from Villupuram to Vellore, stating it revealed a calculated attempt to manipulate and subvert the criminal justice system. He found numerous illegalities in the process and decided to exercise his powers under sections 397 and 401 of the Cr.P.C and Article 227 of the Constitution suo motu to address the calculated attempt to undermine and thwart the administration of criminal justice.
Ponmudy was recently acquitted in a land grab case and is also facing scrutiny from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case related to alleged illegal sand mining.
