THE HINDU EDITORIAL

By
Anushka_Academy
-
0
10

​Delay and bail: On former Tamil Nadu Minister V. Senthilbalaji’s case

Senthilbalaji’s release on bail was overdue, but he should not be made a Minister

Bail is no boon. It is a routine relief for anyone arrested and kept in custody to give the investigating agency enough time to gather evidence about an offence without the risk of interference by the suspect. In fraught times when agencies are seen as political weapons of the ruling dispensation, the release of a political functionary such as former Tamil Nadu Minister V. Senthilbalajion conditional bail becomes a cause for celebration among his party colleagues. The allegations against him are quite serious, and a spell of imprisonment once a serious investigation was taken up was not surprising. However, his prolonged incarceration on the charge of money laundering gave the criminal proceedings against him a political colour. After over 15 months, he has obtained bail from the Supreme Court of India. While courts have been reluctant to grant bail in money laundering cases, it was only a matter of time before the courts began reiterating that bail is the norm, and jail the exception. It is a welcome sign that the Court feels no more constrained by the bail-denying features of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and similar laws. Its concern has now rightly shifted to the possible violation of the remand prisoners’ constitutional rights in the form of protracted delay in commencing and conducting the trial. Therefore, long imprisonment without hope of an early trial has become a justified ground for grant of bail.

In Mr. Senthilbalaji’s case, the PMLA charge arose from the allegation that when he was Transport Minister in the erstwhile AIADMK regime, he had collected bribes through his associates from job aspirants in his department, but ultimately those who had paid for jobs did not get any appointment. The police case regarding this has resulted in six charge sheets. The Court has noted that the final decision in his PMLA case can come only after the trial in respect of these cases. The former Minister, a defector from the AIADMK to the DMK, enjoys unwavering support from his present party, to the extent that Chief Minister and DMK President M.K. Stalin has extolled his “sacrifice” and “resolve”. However, this demonstration of support from one side and loyalty from the other should not mean that the gravity of the offence involved should be forgotten. After all, Mr. Stalin himself had, while he was in the Opposition and Mr. Senthilbalaji a Minister, highlighted the allegations and demanded action. Mr. Senthilbalaji’s entry into the DMK may have changed the political equations between them. However, the cause of justice for the victims of the job scandal and a fair trial for the accused would be served well if Mr. Stalin avoids inducting Mr. Senthilbalaji again in his Cabinet until he is cleared of the charges.