The Madras High Court set aside the discharge of ex-Tamil Nadu Minister KKSSR Ramachandran in a disproportionate assets case.

In that context, the Bench of Justice N Anand Venkatesh observed that, "After these illegalities have come to the notice of this Court, this Court considers it a sacrosanct Constitutional duty of the High Court to intervene on what this Court considers is a matter of principle to prevent the grossest abuse of the judicial process, which has resulted in the miscarriage of justice. If the rule of law is to mean anything, it must mean that politicians and the common man of this State will be equal before the Courts and that the butcher, the baker and the candlelight maker will be treated just the same as a Revenue, Housing or Finance Minister of this State."

In this case, the suo motu criminal revision under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, was initiated against a judgment dated July 20, 2023, by the Principal Sessions Court in Virudhunagar District, Tamil Nadu. The Court had discharged three individuals, including Mr. K.K.S.S.R. Ramachandran, a former Minister in the Tamil Nadu government, from a corruption case.

The prosecution had initially alleged that Mr. Ramachandran and his wife amassed assets disproportionate to their known sources of income during his tenure as a Minister between 2006 and 2010. The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption department registered a case against them in 2011, and the investigation led to a final report in 2012, which accused them of corruption. Over the years, multiple discharge petitions were filed by the accused, delaying the proceedings. In 2021, after a change in government, further investigation was conducted based on new documents introduced by the defense. This further investigation led to a closure report in 2022, which concluded that no offenses were committed.

The Special Court accepted this closure report and discharged the accused in 2023. However, the High Court took notice of this decision and initiated suo motu proceedings, suspecting irregularities in the investigation and the acceptance of the closure report by the Special Court.

The High Court observed that, "the conclusion is that the impugned order of the Special Court deserves to be set aside on the short ground that it had committed a manifest jurisdictional error in discharging the accused in the face of relevant material, the correctness of which could not be the subject matter for inquiry at the stage of discharge. Additionally, the very fact that the Special Court has not assigned a shred of independent reasoning is another reason warranting interference in exercise of revisional powers."

In light of the same, the Court allowed the suo motu revisions, and restored the cases in the Special Court.

Cause Title: Madras High Court (Through Suo Motu) vs The Additional Superintendent of Police & Ors.

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Madras High CourtJustice N Anand VenkateshSuo Motu

Ananya Soni