In Criminal Appeal No.1514 of 2022-SC- Corruption is offence against State & society at large: SC sets aside Madras HC order quashing complaint against TN Minister Senthil Balaji in cash-for-job scam
Justices S.Abdul Nazeer & V. Ramasubramanian [08-09-2022]

Read Judgment: P. DHARAMARAJ Vs. SHANMUGAM & ORS 

Tulip Kanth

New Delhi, September 9, 2022: While observing that the Court cannot deal with cases involving abuse of official position and adoption of corrupt practices, like suits for specific performance, the Supreme Court has restored the criminal complaint against TN Minister Senthil Balaji, his brother and his P.A., which arose out of the cash-for-job scam of 2015.

The Bench of Justice S.Abdul Nazeer and Justice V. Ramasubramanian was considering a matter emanating from a complaint lodged by one K. Arulmani, working in the technical wing of the factory of the Metropolitan Transport Corporation of Tamil Nadu, in which it was asserted that when an announcement in regard to vacancies existing for the posts of Conductor and Driver was made, the complainant was suggested by one Mr. Rajkumar that he had close contact with the then Transport Minister, Mr.Senthil Balaji and his younger brother Asok Kumar, through one Mr. Shanmugam, who was the Personal Assistant to Mr. Senthil Baljai. 

The complainant was advised that on paying money, the complainant and his friends would certainly get jobs. An amount of Rs 40 lakh was paid accordingly. When the list of names was released by the Corporation, the names of persons who had given money had not appeared in that list.The complainant had request in his complaint to initiate appropriate legal action against Senthil Balaji, Asok Kumar, Shanmugam and Raj Kumar for their acts of fraud, deception and also the threats unleashed against the complainant and get him back the sum of Rs 40 lakh.

The then Transport Minister, Senthil Balaji Shri,his brother-Ashok Kumar, his P.A.-Shanmugam and Shri Raj Kumar were cited as the accused in the FIR registered for for alleged offences under Sections 405, 420 and 506(1) of the IPC.When the matter the reached the High Court, an order quashing the criminal complaint was passed on the ground that by passage of time, the parties had decided to bury their hatchet and no useful purpose would be achieved by keeping the criminal case pending. 

Upon coming to know of the quashing of the complaint, P.Dharamaraj, who participated in the process of selection for appointment to the post of drivers/conductors, but was not selected, came up with one special leave petition contending that what happened was a cash-for-job scam and he would have been selected if the scam had not taken place. This SLP was allowed by this Court. 

An organization named Anti Corruption Movement, moved a Miscellaneous Petition before the High Court seeking recall of the quashing order on the ground that the complaint involved allegations of corruption and abuse of official position. When this application was rejected by the High Court, the organization challenged the same with two special leave petitions.

Taking into consideration the final report and the counter affidavit, the Bench opined that the persons who had adopted corrupt practices to secure employment in the Transport Corporation fell under two categories namely, those who paid money and got orders of appointment and those who paid money but failed to secure employment. 

If persons belonging to the second category are allowed to settle their dispute by taking refund of money, the same would affix a seal of approval on the appointment of persons belonging to the first category. Therefore, the High Court ought not to have quashed the criminal proceedings on the basis of the compromise, the Bench held.

On the quality of public service rendered by such persons, who are selected and appointed to posts in the Government/public corporations by adopting corrupt practices, the Bench opined that the public, who are recipients of these services, also become victims, because the consequences of such appointments get reflected sooner or later in the work performed by the appointees

As per the Bench,  there was no way the offence under Section 409 IPC, included in the final report, could have been compounded. Not only this but the Bench also highlighted that  Court has to go slow even while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.PC or Article 226 of the Constitution in the matter of quashing of criminal proceedings on the basis of a settlement reached between the parties, when the offences are capable of having an impact not merely on the complainant and the accused but also on others.

“It is needless to point out that corruption by a public servant is an offence against the State and the society at large”, the Bench said while also adding that all criminal complaints arose out of the very same cash-for-job scam and so, the State ought to have undertaken a comprehensive investigation into the entire scam, without allowing the accused to fish out one case as if it was a private money dispute.

Terming the order of the High Court as completely unsustainable, the Bench restored the criminal complaint and directed the I.O. to  proceed under Section 173(8) of the Code to file a further report.