Madras High Court delivers split judgement in the Habeas Corpus plea in the Senthil Balaji case
The Habeas Corpus plea was filed by Senthil Balaji’s family after his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate.
The Madras High Court has delivered a split judgement in the Senthil Balaji Habeas Corpus plea which was filed by Megala, wife of Senthil Balaji against his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act on June 14.
The matter was heard by Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy. Both the judges delivered split judgements. While Justice J Nisha Banu allowed the Habeas Corpus plea and ordered his immediate release, Justice D Bharath Chakravarthy upheld the arrest by the Enforcement Directorate and said that the Habeas Corpus plea was not maintainable as he had not made the plea that the arrest of Senthil Balaji by the ED was illegal.
Justice J Nisha Banu also dismissed the application filed by the ED for exclusion of the period of treatment undergone by Senthil Balaji while calculating the period of custodial interrogation. However, Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy observed that it was in the interest of the detenue that he has not been in ED’s custody for even a day as he has been undergoing treatment from the day of his arrest. Thus, he ordered that the period from June 14 to the time he is released from the hospital be excluded while calculating the period of custodial interrogation.
Senior lawyer Mukul Rohatgi represented Senthil Balaji and argued that the arrest of Senthil Balaji was made in haste and for political reasons and that there were procedural lapses in the arrest made by the ED. He said that the procedures enunciated in the CrPC were not followed.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta along with Additional Solicitor General ARL Sundaresan and Special Prosecutor N Ramesh, was representing the state and argued against the maintainability of the Habeas Corpus plea as the trial court had not held the arrest illegal. ED also argued that they had served a panchnama to Balaji which he refused to accept. They also argued that the sessions judge had informed Balaji of the reasons of his arrest before passing the remand order.
The bench of Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy said that the matter will ow be referred to Chief Justice Sanjay Vijaykumar Gangapurwala who in turn will appoint a third judge to decide on the issue.
