The Supreme Court has temporarily restrained the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) from proceeding with its probe into allegations of corruption against former Tamil Nadu Minister KT Rajenthra Bhalaji. The allegations stem from a cash-for-job scam case, which has been under scrutiny.
On January 6, the Madras High Court ordered a CBI investigation after observing that the Tamil Nadu government had failed to comply with an earlier directive issued in November 2024. The directive required the state police to file a chargesheet in the case. However, the lack of compliance led the High Court to transfer the investigation to the CBI.
During the hearing before the Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N. Bhatti, two special leave petitions were filed challenging the High Court’s decision. The arguments presented in court highlighted conflicting claims regarding the status of the chargesheet and the need for CBI intervention.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Slams Delhi Government for Delay in Remission Case, Issues Contempt Notice
Senior Advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, representing the Tamil Nadu government, contended that a chargesheet had indeed been filed, contrary to the claims made before the High Court. He further explained that approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act was obtained to continue the investigation. Additionally, a sanction request under Section 19 of the Act was still pending before the Tamil Nadu Governor. He noted that the Governor had sought translated documents, leading to delays.
On the other hand, Senior Advocate V. Giri, appearing for Rajenthra Bhalaji, opposed the transfer of the case to the CBI. He argued that such transfers should not be done arbitrarily without valid reasons. He also pointed out that the High Court had passed its order without hearing all parties involved and had overlooked a previous subordinate bench ruling that denied transferring the investigation.
Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing the complainant, accused the Tamil Nadu government of shielding the former minister, stating:
"The State is protecting this ex-minister."
Justice Pankaj Mithal questioned the legal standing of the complainant in the case, remarking:
"Today, you are no one before us."
Furthermore, Justice S.V.N. Bhatti emphasized the absence of clear reasoning in the High Court’s order for transferring the case to the CBI. He referenced a previous three-judge bench ruling that outlined specific conditions under which a case could be moved to the CBI. He raised concerns, asking:
"Whether this is a fit case for transfer to the CBI or not—nothing [is mentioned in the order]?"
Considering the procedural delays and legal ambiguities, the Supreme Court issued an order directing the Governor to make a decision on granting sanction under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Until then, the CBI has been ordered to halt its investigation.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Extends Justice Gita Mittal Committee's Tenure Until July 31, 2025
The court’s ruling stated:
"In the impugned order dated 6-1-2025, the High Court has directed the transfer of investigation, criminal case no. 19/21, to the CBI only for the reason that the chargesheet was not filed within the time allowed. An affidavit has been filed by the Principal Secretary to the Governor, Tamil Nadu, pursuant to our last order dated 7 March 2025. The affidavit states that steps are being taken with regards to sanction for prosecution under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. However, the Secretariat of the Governor noticed that certain documents were in Tamil and require English translation."
The court permitted the Tamil Nadu government to submit the translated documents within two weeks. It further noted:
"Upon receipt of translated copies of the above documents, the file shall again be submitted to the Governor for the purpose of sanction. In view, we permit the State of Tamil Nadu to submit the translated copies to the Secretariat of the Governor within two weeks. Thereupon, it is expected that the office of the Governor would take a decision on the sanction forthwith. We issue notice to the Respondents... In the meanwhile, we direct that the CBI will not proceed with the investigation."
Case Details: K.T. RAJENTHRABHALAJI Vs THE STATE|D No. 9403/2025 and THE STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE v S RAVINDRAN|SLP(Crl) No. 3186/2025
Petition in Bhalaji's case filed through AOR A Velan
