NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has frowned upon seven months time taken by the Governor's office in granting sanction for prosecution of former Tamil Nadu Minister and D M K leader V Senthil Balaji in three cases with regard to cash-for-job scam in his stint as Transport Minsiter in previous regime.
The apex court, however, declined to consider for now a plea to appoint a special public prosecutor to conduct proceedings.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih noted the sanction has been granted in the cases on August 23, 2024, even though the proposal for permission to prosecute Balaji was submitted to the office of the Governor on January 4, 2024.
"We were wondering why such a long time of seven months was required to deal with the proposal for sanction," the bench said.
Notably, on the date of previous hearing August 23, 2024 at about 12 noon, the bench had directed the state government to place on record the copies of correspondence made with the office of the Governor with regard to sanction.
By the evening, as the apex court's order was uploaded on SC website, the sanction was reportedly granted by the evening.
Appearing for applicant Y Balaji, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan along with advocate Balaji Srinivasan sought a direction for appointment of a special public prosecutor in the matter.
They alleged the state of causing deliberate delay in commencing the trials against the accused in the scam due to extraneous considerations.
The state government was defeating the intent and spirit of the Supreme Court's judgement of May 16, 2023, which allowed the criminal proceedings against the leader in the cash for job scam during his tenure as Transport Minsiter between 2011-2015, the counsel said.
In an affidavit, the Tamil Nadu government came out with regard to experience and credentials of the public prosecutor P Washington Dhanasekaran.
"When public prosecutors are appointed to deal with prosecutions against MPs and MLAs pending before the Special Courts constituted under the orders of this Court, we are sure that the concerned prosecutors are aware about the nature of the responsibilities entrusted to them," the bench said.
"Perhaps, the burden on them is greater as the trials before the Special Courts dealing with the cases of Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly, are being monitored by this Court. The prosecutor has to act as an officer of the court," the bench also said.
In its order, the court also asked Assistant Sessions Judge, Additional Special Court for the Trial of the Cases related to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu, Chennai, to submit a report about the status of the cases and also details about the other cases pending in his court.
![SC Issues Notice to Centre on PIL by Ashwini Upadhyay to Debar Candidates From Contesting Polls on Framing of Charges [Read Petition]](/secure/uploads/2022/09/lj_1437_005ca7f1-c09c-4f29-8382-e746aa4dd230.jpg)
