Habeas corpus petition filed by Senthil Balaji's wife is not maintainable: SG argues at Madras High Court

The Supreme Court, earlier this month, refused to interfere with the Madras High Court order allowing Tamil Nadu Minister V Senthil Balaji to be moved to a private hospital in Chennai and entertaining a habeas corpus petition filed against his arrest.

Chennai (Tamil Nadu): The hearing on the habeas corpus petition filed by Senthil Balaji's wife Megala is currently underway in the Madras High Court. The wife of arrested Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji has submitted an affidavit in the Madras High Court accusing state Bharatiya Janata Party chief K Annamalai of "nursing a grudge" against her husband.

Senthil Balaji was arrested on June 14 by the Enforcement Directorate in a cash-for-jobs scam. Appearing for the Enforcement Directorate (ED), Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta on Tuesday argued at Madras High Court that the habeas corpus petition filed by the wife of Tamil Nadu Minister Senthil Balaji is not maintainable as "there is no code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) provision that requires grounds of arrest to be reduced to writing".

"There is no CrPC provision that requires grounds of arrest to be reduced to writing. Section 19 of PMLA allows the authority to arrest a person if there is reason to believe that he is guilty of an offence under the act," Tushar Mehta said in the High Court. The grounds for the arrest are to be informed as soon as possible and not immediately, Tushar Mehta further argued.

Justices J Nisha Banu and D Bharatha Chakravarthy allowed Senior Counsel NR Elango to make his brief submission before Solicitor General Tushar Mehta. NR Elango continued his arguments by responding to the additional counter of the Enforcement Directorate where he cites Supreme Court judgments including Navlakha case orders. after NR Elango finishes, Solicitor General, SG, Tushar Mehta began arguments for Enforcement Directorate.

NR Elango said that arrest intimation and grounds of arrest documents could not have come into existence by 1.39 am on June 14, says the documents reached before the principal sessions judge on June 16, and not on June 14, this shows 'no application of mind' by the judge. Justice Chakravarthy questioned whether is there a necessity for Enforcement Directorate officials to follow Section 41A of CrPC and issue summons before arrest if the officer was satisfied that there are reasons to arrest the accused.

NRE says, in the present case, Enforcement Directorate officials have not established the absolute necessity to arrest. NR Elango argued in the court that the power of the Enforcement Directorate to subject an accused to custodial interrogation and Enforcement Directorate officials do not have any such power. No power has been given by the Parliament consciously to an investigation officer of the Enforcement Directorate under the PMLA and courts cannot confer such power on them, he said.

Tushar Mehta argued that "If detention is by way of a judicial order, the remedy lies elsewhere. Habeas Corpus Petition will not lie. No court says, despite judicial remand, a writ of habeas corpus can be issued. It's my responsibility to assist the court so that no wrong law is laid down."

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta requested judges to look at Section 65 of PMLA. It states that provisions of Crpc will apply with respect to arrest in so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of PMLA. Tushar Metha also asked judges to read Section 71 of PMLA. Section 19 is not inconsistent with Section 167 of crpc and so we have a right to seek a judicial remand after his ( Senthil Balaji's ) arrest. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta read out Section 4(2) of CrPC and stated that crpc also gives supremacy to special enactments like PMLA.

"Only because PMLA provisions are more rigorous, the SC says that it is a code by itself. The grounds of arrest submitted in a sealed cover to the adjudicating authority will be opened during the time of trial," he stated.

In an affidavit on Sunday, S Megala said, "Detenu [Balaji] contested 2021 elections from Karur Constituency and won with a margin of around 12,400 votes. I further submit that he was nominated by the DMK party as in charge of the western region of Tamil Nadu. I submit Thiru K Annamalai who is the State president of Bharatiya Janata Party, which is the ruling party in the Union Government, has always nursed a grudge against the detenue as he perceives him to be a direct threat in the political arena."

Questioning her husband's arrest, S Magala filed a habeas corpus petition in the Madras High Court. The Minister for Electricity as well as Prohibition and Excise, Balaji, was arrested on June 14 and admitted to a government hospital in Chennai after he complained of chest pain. He was allowed by the Madras High Court on June 15 to be shifted to a private hospital of his choice.

The Supreme Court, earlier this month, refused to interfere with the Madras High Court order allowing Tamil Nadu Minister V Senthil Balaji to be moved to a private hospital in Chennai and entertaining a habeas corpus petition filed against his arrest. Senthil Balaji was arrested on June 14 by the Enforcement Directorate in a cash-for-jobs scam. (ANI)