New Delhi, Jul 30 The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Friday a plea of former minister and DMK leader V Senthil Balaji seeking anticipatory bail in a corruption case pertaining to alleged irregularities in the functioning of the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC).
Earlier in the day, the Madras High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail petition of Balaji in the fresh FIR lodged by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) in the TASMAC scam case.
Soon after the denial of pre-arrest bail by the high court, the top court bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant was urged by senior lawyers Kapil Sibal, Mukul Rohatgi and Amit Anand Tiwari on behalf of the DMK leader that his plea be listed for urgent hearing as he faces imminent coercive action.
The bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, said that it will be listed on Friday.
Balaji represents Coimbatore South in the Tamil Nadu Assembly.
According to the fresh FIR, a large-scale scam took place in TASMAC in the allotment of shops and bars.
Balaji alleged that the FIR quoted verbatim the affidavit of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the petition filed by the anti-money laundering probe agency before the Supreme Court.
In fact, the FIR itself at various places says that it is from the counter affidavit and petition of the ED, the plea said.
"Our contention is that the FIR is for the incident said to have been committed between 2021 and 2025. I am at no flight risk; no custodial interrogation required. I was the minister of the department and TASMAC is a corporation independent in existence and functioning," said senior advocate Tirwari.
He also said there was no direct role or connection and it was political vendetta.
"Also, it is interference with the pending proceeding before the Supreme Court inasmuch as the petition filed by TASMAC and the state of Tamil Nadu in which the ED has filed the said counter-affidavit, which is the basis of the FIR, there is a stay of investigation against TASMAC and no coercive action order. Reliance on such an affidavit of a pending matter is interference with the judicial proceeding," the senior lawyer said.
The plea said it was diametrically opposite to the earlier stand taken by the state government in the matter.
The high court, while rejecting the pre-arrest bail plea of the leader, referred to the prosecution's allegation of causing loss to the exchequer against Balaji and said that custodial questioning was necessary.
The DVAC in its FIR said that Balaji entered into a criminal conspiracy to manipulate TASMAC's functioning by rigging bar and transport tenders, favouring a few select liquor manufacturers, resulting in overpricing of liquor, and causing financial loss to the public exchequer.
The DVAC registered an FIR against seven accused.
The FIR against Balaji, former TASMAC managing director S Visakan and five others was for alleged misappropriation, manipulation of procurement and tender processes in allotting bar licences, transport tenders, and bogus and inflated transactions by certain distilleries and bottling firms.
Balaji's close associates Rathesh Raj Shanmugavel and S Karthik, also known as Mulanoor Karthik, his former personal assistant Bhaskar and former TASMAC officials R Ramadurai Murugan and R Paneerselvam were the five other accused persons.
The FIR highlighted the operation of an alleged organised syndicate known as the "Karur gang", allegedly controlled by Karthik.
Allegedly, the syndicate ran all liquor bars in Karur district and coerced officials into allotting bar licences across Tamil Nadu to their favoured candidates.
The FIR also states that the investigators uncovered extensive fraud in transport tenders awarded for 45 TASMAC depots.
In one instance, nine out of 16 Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) demand drafts submitted by an applicant were illegally retained and reused by senior regional managers to improperly grant transport depot contracts to rival firms.
The FIR also detailed a systematic cash-kickback scheme involving tens of crores, where bottle supply companies generated bogus or inflated invoices for distilleries.
TASMAC retail shops systematically collected excess amounts over the maximum retail price (MRP) from consumers in an organised manner, overcharging between Rs 10 and Rs 100 for standard liquor and up to Rs 500 for foreign liquor, the FIR stated.
The case has been registered under Sections 120B, 167, 409, 109, and 420 of the IPC, corresponding provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (including Sections 61(2), 201, 316(5), 49, and 318(4)), and Sections 7(c), 12, 13(1)(a), and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018).
