The Madras High Court that is hearing a batch of suo motu revision petitions against the discharge and acquittal of several State ministers in cases of disproportionate assets said Thursday that it would treat the cases “as just any other matter” and not be guided by who the offenders were in such cases..Justice G Jayachandran made the observations after Senior Counsel NR Elango, who was appearing for the Tamil Nadu Minister for Revenue and Disaster Management KKSSR Ramachandran, objected to all cases pertaining to MPs and MLAs being grouped together irrespective of the offences and provisions of law concerned..“All cases are being branded together and judges are getting prejudiced the moment they see it is an MP/MLA case,” Elango said.Elango further said that while the High Court had initiated the suo motu revision proceedings, it had not cited any concrete grounds for the same.“There are no grounds, I don't know what to defend,” he said..Justice Jayachandran however, said that the Court’s order provided adequate grounds such as the special court having ordered further investigation in KSSR’s case on its own, and then discharging the Minister based solely on the report of such further investigation..The judge then went on to tell all parties that the Court was aware that the “law was meant for offences and not the offenders.”.Justice Jayachandran further went on to say that he was aware of the problems of grouping all cases pertaining to MPs and MLAs together before the special court but there was little that he could do about it..He also referred to a 2020 report of the three-judge panel of the Madras High Court that had questioned the constitutional validity of setting up special courts to exclusively try MPs and MLAs..“We have already expressed our concerns and our opinion before the Supreme Court. We know the law must be about the offence and not the offender. We have previously said that this will not work but the Supreme Court has overruled this. We have demonstrated how this was going to be a problem but, it (Supreme Court) has passed some strictures too. The amicus (Senior Counsel Vijay Hansaria) had a different opinion and the Supreme Court decided to accept his opinion. So, we cannot do anything about it. All I can do is my duty. I have been allotted this portfolio and I am bound to hear this. I am going to take it as any other case,” Justice Jayachandran said..The judge then directed Elango to file a counter affidavit addressing the issue of whether the further investigation ordered by the special court in KKSSR’s case was “without an ulterior motive,” and whether the report of such investigation alone was “adequate to discharge an accused from a case without a trial?”.It will hear the final arguments in the matter on November 27. .The Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) had initially registered a case against Ramachandran, his wife and a friend of the Minister under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) in December 20, 2011. The DVAC claimed that they were in possession of ₹44.59 lakh disproportionate to their known sources of income during the period between April 1, 2006, and March 31, 2010.In July this year, Sessions Judge V Thilaham accepted a closure report filed by the DVAC and accepted the agency's sudden change of heart concluding that the Minister’s family had excess savings of ₹1.49 lakh and not disproportionate assets worth ₹44.59 lakh. The High Court later initiated suo motu revision against the same.