"Most damaging": Madras High Court slams administrative decision of former HC CJ and 2 judges to transfer trial against DMK minister

In a potentially controversial development, the Madras High Court Thursday took exception to the manner in which trial against TN Minister of Higher Education K Ponmudi was transferred from one district court to another based on the administrative approval granted by three High Court judges, including then Chief Justice (CJ) of the High Court..Single-judge Justice N Anand Venkatesh decided to take 'suo motu revision' of the order passed by judge N Vasanthaleela, the then principal district judge at Vellore (now retired), who acquitted Ponmudi in a disproportionate wealth case in June this year. The single-judge also noted that there was something "seriously amiss" in transfer order passed on the administrative side of the Madras High Court transferring the trial to Vasanthaleela.Saying that it was one of the "most damaging cases" he had come across, Justice Venkatesh directed the Madras High Court registry to issue notices to Ponmudi, and his wife and co-accused in the case, P Visalatchi. He also directed the registry to place the matter before the current Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala for "further information."Justice Venkatesh said the June 28 order passed by the N Vasanthaleela, the then principal district judge, Vellore, who retired just two days after the judgement, was an instance of absolute miscarriage of justice. .Justice Venkatesh is the portfolio judge for cases relating to MPs and MLAs. He said in his order that recently, his attention was drawn to the June 28 order based on a transfer order passed on the administrative side of the Madras High Court.He said that after going through the details, he realised something was "seriously amiss" in the procedure adopted in the matter, including an administrative note that was issued by two of the Madras High Court administrative judges at the time, and the approval granted to that note by the then Chief Justice. Such note that transferred the case against the Ponmudi couple from the district court Villupuram to the principal district judge at Vellore, despite it being subsequently approved by the CJ, was "illegal and non-est in law.".Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari was the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court during the relevant period and the two administrative committee judges were Justices T Raja, and V Bhavani Subborayan. While CJ Bhandari and Justice Raja have since retired, Justice Subborayan is a sitting judge of the Madras High Court. .Justice Venkatesh's order though does not name any of the concerned judges and only refers to their designations. ."The notice of this Court was drawn to a recent judgment that was passed by the learned Principal District Court, Vellore in Special Case No.3 of 2022 based on a transfer order passed on the administrative side of the Madras High Court. The attention of this Court was also drawn to the fact that substantial proceedings were conducted by the Principal District Court, Villupuram and that at the fag end, the case came to be transferred to the file of the Principal District Court, Vellore. This Court felt that there is something seriously amiss about the procedure adopted in transferring the case to a different Court and that too at the fag end of the trial. To top it all, the attention of the Court was also drawn to the fact that final arguments were submitted by way of written submissions on 23.06.2023 and within a span of 4 days ie., on 28.06.2023 the Principal District Judge, Vellore had managed to write a 226-page judgment acquitting the accused. The learned Principal District Judge, Vellore demitted office shortly thereafter on 30.06.2023. As a judge holding the portfolio for cases relating to MP/MLA’s I thought it fit to call for the entire records of Special Case No.3 of 2022 from the Principal District Court, Vellore. On going through the same the doubts entertained by this Court on the strange procedure followed in this case was proved right," Justice Venkatesh said..The case against Ponmudi and his wife was registered by the DVAC in 2002 when the AIADMK returned to power in the State. The DVAC claimed that the accused persons had amassed illegal assets when Ponmudi was a minister in the DMK government between 1996 and 2001..While the trial was being presided over by court in Villupuram, it was suddenly transferred to the Vellore principal district judge on June 7 last year. The Vellore judge then acquitted the Minister and his wife saying that the prosecution had failed to furnish sufficient and legally acceptable evidence against the accused..Incidentally, the administrative note transferring the case had been issued on a totally unrelated request sent months ago by the principal district judge of Villupuram seeking permission to conduct hearing in the case on some non-working days. Once the matter was transferred, a case that had been pending for years, was decided in the accused's favour with much alacrity, Justice Venkatesh noted.."By 06.06.2023, a case which had thus far been lingering on for years started to move with great alacrity. Perhaps, the accused drew inspiration from Paulo Coelho who said that “when you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you to achieve it”. By the first week of June 2023, the celestial stars of the accused appeared to be lining up perfectly, with the blessings of judicial personages, including the Principal District Judge, Vellore who was set to demit office on 30.06.2023. DW-1 was quickly examined on the side of the defense on 06.06.2023. On 23.06.2023, written submissions were made on the side of the accused, and on 28.06.2023, ie., within 4 days, the Principal District, Vellore marshalled the evidence of 172 prosecution witnesses and 381 documents and managed (or rather stage-managed) to deliver a 226-page testament/judgment acquitting all the accused." Justice Venkatesh said in his order. This unique feat of industry on the part of the Principal District Judge, Vellore can find few parallels, and it may well be said is a feat that even judicial mortals in constitutional courts can only dream of, the High Court noted sarcastically. "Two days thereafter, on June 30, 2023, the Principal District Judge, Vellore retired and cheerfully rode off into the sunset," the single-judge further said..Thus he held that the transfer note was a "calculated attempt to manipulate and subvert the criminal justice system" and that ever since the matter was transferred to the Vellore PDJ, nothing was done in accordance with lawIt not open to the High Court either under Section 407 of the CrPC, or under Article 227 to cherry-pick cases and arbitrarily transfer them to any court without any reason, Justice Venkatesh underlined.He further stated that there was no authority either under the Constitution, the Letters Patent or any provision of law, which authorised two high court judges to exercise powers on the administrative side, "to transfer a pending criminal case from one District to another and that too by way of a note."."It follows that the note of the Administrative Judges dated 06.07.2022 and 07.07.2022 directing the transfer of the case from Principal District Court, Villupuram to Principal District Court, Vellore is ex-facie illegal and non-est in law," Justice Venkatesh said. .The decision by the then Chief Justice to grant approval to such transfer also came under fire from the High Curt.The then Chief Justice approving such note of transfer on July 8, 2022, did not make it legal in any way since even the Chief Justice did not have any such power to randomly approve an administrative note transferring a criminal case from one court to another. "The Chief Justice is the Master of the Roster vis-à-vis the Benches in the High Court. It does not follow that the Chief Justice enjoys administrative power to transfer a criminal case pending in a District Court to another District. No such power exists or has been shown to exist either by law or by convention. Consequently, the approval of the Hon’ble Chief Justice on 08.07.2022 does not clothe the note order of the Administrative judges with any legality. Consequently, the Official Communication dated 12.07.2022 directing the transfer of the case from PDJ, Villupuram to PDJ, Vellore, the transfer to the PDJ, Vellore under the orders of the PDJ, Villupuram followed by the trial and the 226-page judgment delivered thereafter on 28.06.2023 are all coram-non-judice," Justice Venkatesh said. .Justice Venkatesh cited the Supreme Court's judgements in Y Balaji v Karthik Desari and several other cases to say that the High Court can suo motu exercise its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution and Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC to interfere and set right illegalities..[Read order]