Madras HC orders trial in graft case against late DMK strongman Veerapandi Arumugam's kin
The prosecution was not afforded an adequate opportunity to present its case, and the rejection of its materials at the discharge stage by the trial court was unwarranted and legally unsustainable, Justice P Velmurugan held, while allowing the revision petition moved by the State challenging the trial court order.
L-R DMK strongman Veerapandi Arumugam (Credit: Wikipedia), a view of Madras HC
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court held that the trial court order discharging the family members of late DMK minister Veerapandi S Arumugam, including his wives, from the disproportionate assets case is erroneous and directed to frame charges and conduct a trial.
The prosecution was not afforded an adequate opportunity to present its case, and the rejection of its materials at the discharge stage by the trial court was unwarranted and legally unsustainable, Justice P Velmurugan held, while allowing the revision petition moved by the State challenging the trial court order.
The prosecution’s allegation – that the former minister accumulated wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income and used his family members as benamis to conceal the corruption – should be tested in the trial to evaluate its credibility, wrote the judge.
However, the trial court, instead of allowing the prosecution to lead evidence, prematurely rejected its case based on presumptions favouring the accused; this approach runs contrary to the well-settled legal principle, wrote the judge.
In 2004, the directorate of vigilance and anti-corruption (DVAC) booked S Arumugam and six of his family members, including his two wives Ranganayagee and Leela.
The case is that Arumugam while holding a public office as minister, between 1996 and 2001, exploited his official post and accumulated Rs 1.80 crore.
The DVAC booked Arumugam under Sections 13 (2) and 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and added his family members under section 109 IPC and sections 13 (2), 13 (1) (e) of the same act.
The prosecution filed a chargesheet before the chief judicial magistrate, Salem. While the matter was pending before the trial court, all the accused filed a petition seeking discharge.
In 2006, a trial court allowed the petition and discharged all the accused from the case. The state then moved the high court for a criminal revision.
However, the HC dismissed the revision petitions as the main accused Arumugam died and abated the charges against all the accused. Later, the matter went to the Supreme Court, where it was held that the death of the main accused does not result in the abatement of charge against the remaining accused and sent the matter back to the HC.
