The ED on Monday challenged Tamil Nadu Minister V Senthil Balaji's bail application, claiming that a review of his petition demonstrates that granting him bail does not need any consideration, news agency PTI reported. The petitioner was highly powerful and influential, and if given bail, he could influence the inquiry or threaten the witnesses, it stated. Rather, the court's consideration was necessary to begin the trial by calling the prosecution's list of witnesses in order to proceed with the trial and establish the accusation for which there is strong evidence, the Enforcement Directorate informed a local court.


Karthik Dasari, Deputy Director, of Enforcement Directorate, and the investigative officer in the current case, claimed the foregoing in his counter-affidavit filed in response to Senthil Balaji's plea requesting bail in a money laundering case following his detention in June 2023.


Principal Sessions Judge S Alli, before whom the counter-affidavit was submitted, scheduled a hearing on the issue for January 9.


According to the ED, Balaji is still a sitting Minister in the Government of Tamil Nadu with no portfolio and enjoys the perks of a Minister as of the date of filing of this bail plea. As a result, after receiving a copy of the prosecution complaint, the accused learned the identity of all the witnesses who had testified against him.


The petitioner was a highly powerful and influential person, and if he was given bail, there was a great likelihood that the accused would use his freedom to influence, derail, or obstruct the inquiry, or threaten the witnesses, it noted.


Dasari said in his rebuttal that the entire bail petition was about the integrity of the evidence/documents presented by the ED before this Court. Notably, Balaji has submitted the current bail plea on the grounds that have already been considered and settled by the different Courts. However, the petitioner is again arguing on the same grounds, this time by hiding all important facts and wasting this court's valuable time, he noted.


The ED stated that the passage of time does not constitute a change in circumstances warranting the filing of a subsequent bail petition. Simply because the petitioner/accused's inquiry was done and there was no need for custodial questioning does not imply that conditions had changed.


The filing of a prosecution complaint in no way diminishes the claims made by the complainant; rather, it indicates that, after thorough inquiry, the agency discovered information and filed a prosecution complaint against the accused.


Even so, he continued, at the stage of assessing the issue of bail, the court was not to analyse the validity of the chargesheet or FIR in the scheduled offence, but simply to determine if a scheduled offence was committed, which created proceeds of crime.


The evidence unmistakably shows that the plot to swap cash for job placements, about which the Minister claimed ignorance, was devised and carried out under his control. He went on to say that the proceeds of the illicit operations were subsequently laundered, involving layering and integration into the mainstream via cash deposits/associates for further use in conjunction with additional suspects.


Balaji's allegation that he was imprisoned for 182 days was dismissed as false. He stated that from June 14 to July 17, 2023, the petitioner was in the hospital, and then from August 12, 2023 to date, he was in the jail hospital with all the amenities.


Balaji was arrested by the ED in a cash-for-jobs scandal under a previous AIADMK rule when he was in charge of the Transport ministry.