Justice N Anand Venkatesh Of Madras HC Issues Notices On Suo Moto Revision Of Discharge Of DMK Minister I Periyasamy And AIADMK's B Valaramathi

Justice N Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court today (8 September) issued notices on suo moto revision of the discharge of Rural Development minister I Periyasamy of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and B Valarmathi, a former Social Welfare minister from the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK).

The notices were issued to the accused and the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC).

While the case against Periyasamy was under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Valarmathi was facing a disproportionate assets case.

The suo moto revision of the discharge of Periyasamy and Valarmathi comes after similar revisions of the acquittal of Higher Education minister K Ponmudy and discharge of Finance minister Thangam Thennarasu, Revenue minister KKSSR Ramachandran and former chief minister from the AIADMK, O Panneerselvam (OPS).

Speaking about the series of suo moto revisions undertaken by him in his capacity as the judge in charge of MP/MLA Special Courts, he said, "It's like I've opened a can of worms. Case after case, I'm becoming sick. The system has failed systematically. It's becoming shocking. You can give any interpretation but these are facts. I'm tired of looking at cases like this on a regular basis."

The Case Against I Periyasamy

According to a report by The Hindu, Periyasamy had been booked by the DVAC for allotting a Tamil Nadu Housing Board (TNHB) plot to C Ganesan, who had served as the personal security officer to former chief minister M Karunanidhi.

The allotment was done by Periyasamy in March 2008 during his tenure as Housing minister under the state government's discretionary quota.

As per the investigation of the DVAC, Ganesan was residing at a TNHB quarters that was allotted to him because he was a police officer. He, however, falsely stated that he was residing in a private accommodation and requested the allotment of a TNHB plot.

His request was cleared by the ministry and Periyamsamy in March 2008. The investigation found that even before he got the allotment order, he had made an agreement with K Padma, a real estate developer to develop the plot and gave her the power of attorney.

Ganesan and Padma were also named as accused in the case.

Periyasamy and Ganesan moved the Madras High Court for discharge in the case in November 2022 but their petitions were dismissed.

Following this, Periyasamy moved another petition for discharge before the MP/MLA Special Court saying that the sanction to prosecute him must have been taken from the Governor and not from the Speaker.

The DVAC argued that as he was only an MLA at the time of filing the chargesheet and so sanction was taken from the Speaker.

However, G Jayavel, the presiding officer of the Special Court said that as per the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in such cases sanction must be obtained from the person who could remove a public servant from his position at the time when the offence was committed. Thus, he concluded sanction must have been taken from the Governor.

The DVAC also stated that a discharge petition could not be filed after the beginning of the trial. The Special Court cited the Supreme Court's ruling in Nanjappa versus State of Karnataka (2015) to state that the request for discharge could be brought up at any time.

Citing the aforementioned reasons, the Special Court discharged Periyasamy.

The Case Against B Valarmathi

Valarmathi was discharged from a disproportionate assets case on 24 December 2012 by a Special Court in Chennai.

She and her family members were accused of accumulating disproportionate assets worth Rs 1.7 crore during her tenure as a minister in the AIADMK government between 2001 and 2006.

Justice Venkatesh Requested Not To Hear Ponmudy Case

The suo moto revision of these cases comes after Advocates Siddharth Luthra and NR Elango who appeared for the DVAC and Ponmudy respectively, in a similar case requested Justice Venkatesh not to hear the case.

To this Justice Venkatesh said that he would inform them of his decision on 14 September. The request was made saying that he had already made very strong remarks on the case. The DVAC also argued that the suo moto revision had been taken up before the expiry of the appeal period.

Also Read: "A Manifest Illegality By A Criminal Court"- Madras HC's Scathing Remarks As It Takes Up Suo Moto Revision Of DMK Minister Ponmudy's Acquittal From DA Case

'Court Smelt A Rat' Says Justice Anand Venkatesh On Discharge Of DMK Ministers Thangam Thennarasu And KKSSR Ramachandran In Assets Cases