A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi rejected Balaji’s contention, put forward by senior lawyer Kapil Sibal who represented him, that this court had never said anything about his ministerial tenure.
“We do not read the order or can interpret it as an injunction for you to become a minister. However, if the atmosphere of the state is affected by your becoming a minister or occupying a position of power, then we must ensure that the justice system prevails,” the bench said.
Sibal said there was not a word in the April 28 order that Balaji would become a minister and there could be no injunction from the court compelling him to become a minister while he was being prosecuted.
Justice Kant asked Sibal why the clarification petition was filed after the retirement of Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay S Oka, who asked him to resign as a minister in the Tamil Nadu government.
Read More: Live Updates of Bihar Election Date 2025
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Enforcement Directorate, also questioned the timing of the request and said it was not in good taste.
Justice Kant told Sibal: “This court has not stopped you from assuming the post of minister and it cannot stop you from doing so. But after it was found that by becoming a minister just days after being released on bail, you exercised some influence in the trial of the cases, the court said it was better for you to go to jail.”
Sibal pointed out that this may have been in the mind of the court, but it was not reflected in the order and hence this application was filed.
Justice Bagchi said there were allegations of influence and the court found them to be prima facie correct.
Mehta and senior lawyer Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing victims of the scam, spoke following a sequence of orders in the case and said the court had on April 23 issued an ultimatum to Balaji and asked him to make a choice “between post and freedom”, warning him to cancel his bail if he did not resign from his post as minister.
Sensing the mood of the court, Sibal sought permission to withdraw his plea.
The court allowed him to withdraw his plea seeking clarification.
In another Balaji-related case, where victims approached the court seeking appointment of a special public prosecutor, the bench asked the Tamil Nadu government why these ‘cash for work’ scam cases involving the former minister and state officials would not be transferred to Delhi or some other neutral venue.
Read more: Cough syrup kills children: Maharashtra, Telangana report batches of Coldrif after death of Rajasthan MP
Senior lawyers Abhishek Singhvi and Amit Anand Tiwari, appearing for the Tamil Nadu government, opposed the court’s suggestion, saying failure to do anything in these cases would be a reflection on the state’s judicial system.
“We are only suggesting why not shift the trial to Delhi or some other neutral ground as the investigation is over and only the trial remains. The witnesses can depose virtually, if necessary. This is the court’s suggestion because whenever a senior state official or a minister is involved in criminal cases, allegations of influence or delay in the trial are inevitable,” the bench said.
Singhvi and Tiwari sought time to file their response on the issue, saying the response of the accused needed to be seen on the issue of shifting the trial outside the state.
Sankaranarayanan argued that when a former chief minister of the state was involved in a criminal case, the trial was transferred to Karnataka and the court could also think along those lines.
The bench said it would look into the matter and recorded a table of top lawyers submitted by Sankaranarayanan for appointment as special public prosecutors.
He also asked the state government councils to submit names for appointment as special prosecutors.
The apex court was hearing a petition filed by Y Balaji, challenging the March 28 order of the Madras High Court dismissing pleas against the trumping up of several chargesheets in cases related to the alleged scam.
On July 30, terming the trial involving Balaji a “rudderless ship”, the apex court said a cricket stadium would be required to conduct prosecutions in cases related to the work-for-hire scam, in which more than 2,000 people have been implicated as accused.
Learn more: Elections in Bihar: Voting in two phases on November 6 and 11, result on November 14, EC announces
He called out the Tamil Nadu government for implicating so many people as accused, questioned whether they were victims or attackers and sought details of the accused and witnesses.
The top court said it was India’s most crowded trial, with 2,000 defendants and 500 witnesses, and a small courtroom would not suffice.
Balaji resigned from the state cabinet headed by MK Stalin on April 27 after being removed from office by the top court.
On April 23, the apex court expressed outrage over Balaji being reinstated as minister, days after he was granted bail in a money laundering case linked to the alleged cash-for-job scam.
On September 26, 2024, the top court granted bail to Balaji in a case being probed by the Enforcement Directorate.
As Balaji spent over 15 months in jail, the top court observed that there was no possibility of the trial ending in the near future.
