Tamil Nadu
Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere In Madras HC's Suo Moto Revision Of DMK Minister Ponmudy's Acquittal; CJI Praises Justice N Anand Venkatesh
Ponmudy had approached the Supreme Court regarding the suo moto revision ordered by the Madras HC
A Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, today (6 November) refused to entertain a plea challenging the suo-moto revision of the acquittal of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) minister K Ponmudy and his wife Visalatchi in a disproportionate assets case by Justice N Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court but stated that the petitioners were at liberty to challenge the revision before the High Court.
In scathing remarks, Justice Venkatesh had questioned the process of transfer of the case from the District Judge in Vellore to the District Judge in Villupuram and the trial conducted by the latter.
Regarding the speed of the trial, Justice Venkatesh had written in his order, “Within four days thereafter, the Vellore Principal District Judge marshalled the evidence of 172 prosecution witnesses and 381 documents and managed (or rather stage-managed) to deliver a 226-page testament/judgment acquitting all the accused on June 28, 2023.
"This unique feat of industry on the part of the Principal District Judge, Vellore, can find few parallels, and it may well be said is a feat that even judicial mortals in constitutional courts can only dream of.”
According to a report by LiveLaw, CJI Chandrachud stated that Justice Venkatesh was "absolutely right in his observations" and he asked Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who was appearing for the petitioners to argue before the High Court that it did not have the suo moto power.
Regarding the process of transfer, CJI Chandrachud said, "Thank God that we have judges like Anand Venkatesh in High Courts. Look at the conduct. The Chief Justice transfers the trial from one district to another district. Where is that power? There is no administrative power to transfer trial. It is a judicial power."
The bench did not make any remarks on an appeal by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) against the suo-moto revision, as it was not listed for hearing today.
When Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who was appearing for an intervenor in the case, alleged that the state government had colluded with the accused, who is a minister and therefore a special public prosecutor or amicus curiae should be appointed, the bench stated that the High Court judge would take a call on it as the matter is pending before him.
The case is now being heard by Justice G Jayachandran of the Madras High Court as Justice Venkatesh, who heard the case earlier, was allotted to the Madurai Bench as per the latest roster.
Ponmudy and the DVAC had requested Justice Venkatesh to recuse from the case, saying that he had made certain strong remarks in the matter. The DVAC had also contended that the suo moto revision had been taken up before the end of the appeal period.
However, Justice Venkatesh refused to recuse from hearing the case stating that merely expressing a strong view while ordering notices to be issued was not enough to raise a plea of bias.
