New Delhi, Sept 23 (UNI) The Supreme Court has stayed the Madras High Court order that had set aside the discharge of Tamil Nadu Minister M. Durai Murugan and his wife D. Shanthakumari in a disproportionate assets (DA) case.
A bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih issued notice to the Tamil Nadu government and sought its response on a special leave petition filed by the Minister and his wife challenging the April 24, 2025 order of the High Court.
The top court also stayed further proceedings in the trial court and directed that the matter be tagged with similar pending cases concerning sanction for prosecution.
Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and P. Wilson, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the sanction for prosecution was invalid, as it was obtained from the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly though it should have been sought from the Governor.
They contended that the alleged offences pertain to a period when Murugan was serving as a minister, not as an MLA.
The plea further argued that the prosecution illegally clubbed the assets of the Minister with those of his wife.
Shanthakumari, who has been an independent businesswoman and an income tax assessee since 1980, had her own income and separate financial records.
The petitioners claimed that, absent the clubbing, the assets would not appear disproportionate to their known sources of income.
It was also pointed out that the final report was based largely on income tax returns and failed to consider that several properties in Shanthakumari’s name were purchased much before the check period.
“When the sources of income for purchase of assets are borne out from the IT returns and no contrary material is filed by the prosecution, the charge of disproportionate assets is groundless,” the plea stated.
The prosecution had alleged that Murugan and his wife amassed disproportionate assets worth Rs 1.40 crore during the period May 13, 2006 to May 14, 2011, when Murugan was serving as a minister in the Tamil Nadu government.
An FIR was lodged on November 23, 2011 by the Deputy Superintendent of Police under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
In January 2017, a Special Judge/Chief Judicial Magistrate in Vellore discharged the petitioners.
However, the Madras High Court, on a revision petition filed by the state government, set aside the discharge order earlier this year, paving the way for revival of trial proceedings.
Challenging this decision, the petitioners maintained before the Supreme Court that the High Court failed to provide reasons for reversing the trial court’s finding that the wife’s properties were acquired from her own independent income.
The Supreme Court will now hear the matter along with other pending cases that deal with the question of competent sanctioning authority in corruption prosecutions.
