In a significant legal development, the Madras High Court has overturned the discharge of Tamil Nadu Rural Development Minister I. Periyasamy in a disproportionate asset case. Justice P. Velmurugan, presiding over the matter, found that the Special Judge in Dindigul had erred in discharging the Minister and his family members, directing instead that charges be framed against them and the trial be completed within six months.
The case dates back to 2012 when the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) registered a case against Periyasamy under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The allegations centered on the Minister's tenure from 2006 to 2011, during which he was accused of amassing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income, amounting to approximately ₹2.01 crore. The DVAC's investigation concluded that the Minister and his family had acquired assets beyond their legitimate earnings.
Periyasamy and the other accused contested the charges, arguing that the wealth had been miscalculated and attributing the case to political vendetta. However, the High Court dismissed these claims, stating that such contentions could be addressed during the trial. The Court emphasized that the Special Judge had overstepped by making determinations at the stage of framing charges, a responsibility that lies with the prosecution to present its case.
This ruling aligns with the Court's previous decisions in similar cases involving other Tamil Nadu Ministers, where discharges in disproportionate asset cases were also set aside. The High Court's consistent stance underscores its commitment to ensuring that allegations of corruption are thoroughly examined and adjudicated.
Justice Velmurugan's directive for a day-to-day trial and the imposition of a six-month deadline for its completion reflect the Court's intent to expedite proceedings and uphold the integrity of the judicial process. The decision serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in holding public officials accountable and reinforcing the rule of law.
The case, titled State v. I. Periyasamy (2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 159), stands as a testament to the judiciary's vigilance in addressing corruption, irrespective of an individual's political standing. It reinforces the principle that legal processes must be free from political interference and that justice must be served in a timely and transparent manner.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.