Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Image
Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces The Supreme Court of India has suggested that the Union Government develop a comprehensive policy addressing the construction of feeding rooms and childcare facilities  in public places. This move aims to ensure that nursing mothers and their children can access basic amenities in a dignified and private manner, reinforcing their fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution. SC Encourages Policy Formulation A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna  and Justice N Kotiswar Singh  highlighted the absence of a structured framework to address this pressing issue. The court advised the Centre to propose a policy that could then be implemented across the states, scheduling the next hearing for December 10, 2024.   The apex court emphasized that before issuing formal directions, it was crucial to understand the Centre’s perspective on implementing the petitioner’s demand for childcare and feedi...
Post a Comment

Supreme Court Decision: V. Senthil Balaji vs The Directorate of Enforcement

Supreme Court Decision: V. Senthil Balaji vs 

The Directorate of Enforcement



Background and Case Summary

The case under discussion is Criminal Appeal No. 4011 of 2024, which arose from Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 3986 of 2024. V. Senthil Balaji, a former Transport Minister in Tamil Nadu (2011-2016), was accused of involvement in a significant job racketeering scheme. The charges against him primarily relate to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.


Allegations

The allegations stem from several FIRs filed between 2015 and 2018, which accuse Balaji of promising jobs in the Transport Department in exchange for money. It was claimed that Balaji, along with his associates, collected large sums of money for posts like drivers, conductors, junior tradesmen, and engineers. Over 2,000 individuals were named as accused, and multiple chargesheets were filed under sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and the PMLA.


The Enforcement Directorate (ED) filed an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) based on these allegations and arrested Balaji in June 2023, accusing him of laundering money through various illegal schemes.


Grounds for Bail Rejection

Balaji’s bail application was originally rejected by the Madras High Court, leading to this appeal. His defense contended that:

- The ED’s case was built on evidence collected by other investigating agencies.

- Incriminating documents were allegedly found on a pen drive during a search at his premises. However, forensic analysis indicated discrepancies, as a key file (CS AC) was missing.

- The money in question (Rs. 1.34 crores) was claimed to be his legitimate income as an MLA and from agriculture.


Despite these arguments, the prosecution highlighted serious discrepancies in the defense's claims, citing that Balaji’s salary as an MLA was deposited directly into his bank account and that his agricultural income could not account for the large cash deposits. Further, the ED presented extensive evidence of money laundering activities, including seized electronic records and large unexplained cash transactions.


Court’s Consideration

The Supreme Court, after reviewing the arguments, outlined several key aspects:

1. Incriminating Evidence: The court acknowledged that prima facie evidence, including forensic and electronic data, pointed to Balaji's involvement in the laundering of Rs. 67.74 crores.

2. Proceeds of Crime: The PMLA case is tied directly to scheduled offenses under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act. These predicate offenses form the foundation of the laundering charges.

3. Complexity and Delay: The sheer scale of the case, with over 2,000 accused and 600 witnesses, led the court to observe that the trial would take several years to conclude. The delay in starting the trials for the scheduled offenses was also a significant concern, as it would likely prolong the money laundering trial.


Right to Bail and Liberty

Balaji had been incarcerated for over 15 months, and considering the delays in the trial process, the court stressed the importance of the constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. This led the court to conclude that denying bail indefinitely would infringe upon this right. The court also drew upon similar cases, including Manish Sisodia vs Directorate of Enforcement and K.A. Najeeb vs Union of India, to highlight that long periods of pre-trial incarceration without a timely trial violated fundamental rights.


Bail Conditions

The court granted bail to Balaji but imposed stringent conditions to prevent him from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence. These conditions include:

- Furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,00,000 with two sureties.

- Regularly marking attendance with the Directorate of Enforcement and not contacting prosecution witnesses.

- Surrendering his passport to the court and appearing before both the Special Court and the court handling the scheduled offenses.


Conclusion

While Balaji was granted bail, the Supreme Court’s decision emphasizes the balance between the gravity of offenses under the PMLA and the fundamental rights of the accused. The case underscores the challenges in handling complex white-collar crimes, where prolonged trials can result in significant pre-trial detentions. The court’s ruling highlighted the importance of timely trials, especially in cases involving stringent laws like the PMLA.

Location: Pune, Maharashtra, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines

Image
Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines Background In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set out guidelines to curb arbitrary demolitions, commonly referred to as "bulldozer justice." This term has emerged from instances where properties of individuals accused of crimes have been demolished without following due legal process. The ruling responds to several petitions highlighting the destruction of residential and commercial properties without prior notice, which, according to petitioners, targets marginalized and minority communities. Key Principles Addressed The Supreme Court’s decision rests on critical constitutional principles, particularly the rule of law, separation of powers, and protection of individual rights . The Court emphasized that no person should be punished without due process and that arbitrary action by the executive undermines citizens’ trust in the justice system. Justice Gavai, in del...
Read more

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores

Image
Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager  Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores  The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Varun Vashista , a former bank manager accused of embezzling over ₹13 crores from a customer’s account while working at ICICI Bank's Vikas Puri branch. The bail was approved by Justice Amit Mahajan on November 12, 2024, after considering the evidence and facts of the case.   Details of the Case The allegations against Vashista stem from his role as a branch manager. The complainant and her husband had entrusted him with managing their investments, amounting to ₹13.5 crores, between 2019 and 2023.   The complainant discovered in January 2024 that nearly ₹12 crores had been **siphoned off** from her account. Key allegations include:   - Creation of Fake Fixed Deposits: The accused reportedly created fraudulent fixed deposit accounts in the complainant’s name.   - Misappropriation of Funds: Funds were tr...
Read more

Equality Before Law

Image
                            Equality Before Law                                                   Introduction The rule of law was firstly introduced by A.V. Dicey in  his book "The Constitution Of England" in which there is rule which only prevails is law in which all are equal. In simple word if any wrong is being done which is not justifiable  by law committed by anyone that may be president, prime minister, or any individual are punishable because there is supremacy of law. Supremacy of law means the government which is power or the people who elected the government all will be treated equally before law.  Article 14 The Indian Constitution 1949, Article 14 guarantees "Equality before law The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the...
Read more