Supreme Court declines to entertain V Senthil Balaji plea against order which forced him to resign as Minister

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain an application moved by former Tamil Nadu Minister and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader V Senthil Balaji for a clarification with regard to the order that forced him to resign as minister in April this year.

The apex court had granted bail to Balaji in September 2024 in a money laundering case. This was based on an understanding that Balaji was no longer a minister after he had resigned from the post.

However, he was later reinstated as minister and subsequently an application was moved to recall his bail. Balaji then resigned as minister for the second time after the top court made strong observations against him on April 23 and told him that he has to either resign or go back to jail.

In the latest application moved by him, he sought a clarification that a paragraph in the April 28 order passed by a bench led by Justice Abhay S Oka (who has since retired) did not amount to an order that he cannot become a minister during the pendency of the money laundering trial.

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymala Bagchi today said the earlier order did not prevent Balaji from becoming a minister as it only recorded a submission. However, the Court also said that it could cancel his bail in case his becomes a minister.

"This is the reflection of the mind of the Court. The Court has not prevented you from becoming minister. But the day you become minister, when we find that you have earlier been accused of influencing the witnesses, we cancel the bail again," Justice Kant said.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Balaji, submitted that his bail can be cancelled if he is found influencing anybody. The Court then pointed out that there in fact were such allegations.

In response, Sibal said there was no allegation of influencing witnesses.

"If it is found at any stage that I am indulging in such activities, lordships may recall that order. Trial is yet to commence," he added.

However, the Court reminded that the bail was granted over prolonged incarceration. It also said that in the name of clarification, Balaji was seeking a modification of the earlier order. Sibal argued that the Court cannot issue a mandate that he cannot become a minister.

The Court was not convinced and remarked that Balaji better not press the application.

"If the application is to be heard on merits then Justice Masih should also be there on the bench. But we are now not considering this proposal. We are asking to withdraw unconditionally," the Court added.

It also remarked that the language of that order is clear and that application for clarification was misconceived. Balaji's counsel then chose to withdraw the plea and it was dismissed as withdrawn.

"There is no mandate I didn’t want the order to be misunderstood like that. They can always move an application if the witnesses are being influenced," he said.

Earlier in the hearing, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta opposed the application and said it was filed after retirement of Justice Oka who had passed the earlier order and strictures against Balaji.

"This is not in good taste," SG Mehta said.

Mehta also said the Court had given Balaji two options in April - either to resign and stay out of jail or go back to prison.

"There was no mandate," he added.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the applicant who had sought recall of Balaji's bail, also opposed the application.

Balaji is being investigated in a money laundering case linked to the cash-for-jobs scam during his tenure as Transport Minister.

The apex court had granted him bail in September 2024 on the understanding that Balaji was no longer a minister. However, he resumed his ministerial duties shortly after, raising concerns about potential influence over witnesses. On April 23 this year, the Court had orally remarked,

“We had granted bail on totally different grounds. If people are going to play with the process of law like this… we will record in our order that we made a mistake in ignoring the judgment findings against you...We will give you a choice: post or freedom."

The remarks came during proceedings on a plea seeking recall of the bail order of September 26, 2024. The plea was filed by K Vidhya Kumar, who argued that Balaji’s reinstatement as a Cabinet Minister in the Tamil Nadu government, after securing bail in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) case, could impair the fairness of the trial.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED), which had initially arrested Balaji on June 14, 2023, supported the plea and argued that Balaji had continued to wield political power even during his incarceration. The agency also highlighted that several witnesses in the case are public servants who previously reported to him.

The Court then made strong remarks against him on April 23 forcing him to resign as minister.

Today, in another development, the Court issued notice on the application seeking transfer of trial against Balaji to outside Tamil Nadu.

On the Court's suggestion that the trial could be transferred to Delhi, the counsel appearing for prosecution said it may not be possible since all the witnesses are based in Tamil Nadu.

However, the Court said,

"We are not passing any order today. We are suggesting so that such allegations against the State do not come."