Justice Anand Venkatesh of Madras High Court refuses to recuse from case against acquittal of Minister K Ponmudi

Madras High Court judge Justice N Anand Venkatesh Thursday declined to recuse from hearing the suo motu revision petition against the acquittal of Tamil Nadu minister for higher education, K Ponmudi and his family members in a disproportionate assets case..Justice Venkatesh said he had examined the Court’s powers as regards suo motu jurisdiction and found no reason to recuse from the hearing.He posted the matter for further hearing on October 9..Last week, Senior Counsel Sidharth Luthra and NR Elango representing Tamil Nadu’s Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) and K Ponmudi respectively, had asked Justice Venkatesh to recuse from hearing the revision petition.The senior lawyers had said that while the issue of the Court’s suo motu revisional jurisdiction needs to be decided, Justice Venkatesh must, in the interest of the principles of judicial propriety, recuse from the matter.Luthra had argued that Justice Venkatesh’s order issuing notice to Ponmudi and other respondents in the case contained strong observations and indicated that the judge had “pre-determined” the issue. He had also said that the Court’s suo motu revision had “thwarted” the State government’s chances of filing an appeal challenging the special court’s order acquitting Ponmudi..Justice Venkatesh however, said the State’s submissions made through Luthra seemed “curious” and “mysterious” for if the High Court did end up setting aside the special court’s order, the State will achieve the same result as it would have, had it filed an appeal and secured a favourable order..“Thus, the objection as regards bias can only be raised at the instance of a person who has suffered or is likely to suffer an adverse adjudication. As the risk of repetition, assuming that the order of acquittal passed by the Special Court is to be set aside, the State would be a direct beneficiary for it would be achieving the same result that it would achieve by filing an appeal. It is, therefore, very strange and curious that the State must allege bias especially since it claims to be a person aggrieved against the orders of the Special Court, and is contemplating filing an appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. It is, therefore, a mystery as to why the mighty State is shooting a plea of bias at this Court from the shoulders of the accused. For the aforesaid reasons, the plea of bias alleged by the State must be rejected as completely misconceived,” Justice Venkatesh said..Justice Venkatesh also said that the Court had issued notice because it intended to hear all parties before passing any final orders. Besides, mere expression of a strong view at a preliminary stage was not enough to merit recusal, the judge said.“In view of the above, there is no substance in the plea that this Court is disqualified to hear the matter in view of the observations made by it in its order dated 10.08.2023,” Justice Venkatesh said..On August 10 this year, Justice Venkatesh, who is also the portfolio judge for special courts dealing with cases of MPs and MLAs, had decided to take suo motu revision against the order passed by special judge N Vasanthaleela, who had acquitted Ponmudi in a disproportionate wealth case in June. Justice Venkatesh had said at the time that there was something "seriously amiss" in transfer order passed on the administrative side of the Madras High Court transferring the trial to Vasanthaleela..The judge had also initiated suo motu revision proceedings against the discharge of O Panneerselvam (OPS) and his relatives in a disproportionate assets case from 2012.In that case, Justice Venkatesh had observed that the DVAC, which prosecutes cases of corruption by legislators, drops such cases when a new party comes into power.Justice Venkatesh has also taken up revision against the discharge of Ministers KSSR Ramachandran and Thangam Thennarasu..[Read Order]