Split verdict in 2012 granite scam case, CJ may assign third judge
MADURAI: A division bench of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has delivered a split verdict on a revision petition filed by one of the accused in the 2012 granite scam, challenging the dismissal of his discharge plea against proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The matter has been referred to the chief justice of the high court for nomination of a third judge to decide the case.
The bench comprising Justices GR Swaminathan and R Poornima was hearing a plea by S Nagarajan, one of the directors of Olympus Granites Pvt Ltd. He had challenged the May 2024 order of the II Additional District Judge which refused to discharge him from the case.
Justice Poornima observed that there was prima facie material against Nagarajan and noted that courts need not weigh evidence in detail at the stage of framing charges. Only a prima facie connection with the crime is required, she said, and dismissed the revision petition. However, Justice Swaminathan disagreed, stating that the trial court's order lacked proper reasoning .
Mere use of stereotyped expressions is not enough. Though the order need not resemble a conviction, it must contain a broad discussion of facts to show why the case should proceed, he said, recommending the order be set aside and the matter remitted to the trial court for fresh consideration.
Nagarajan and co-accused Durai Dayanidhi were booked for illegal mining of granite worth Rs 256.44 crore. The ED also filed a complaint before the PMLA special court, which took cognizance in 2020.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Madras HC seeks report from top cop on pending IPC cases
CHENNAI: Questioning the discrepancies in the number of criminal cases pending at different stages as per the information furnished to the jurisdictional court and the statistics available with the police, the Madras High Court on Monday directed the Greater Chennai Police (GCP) Commissioner A Arun, who was present in the court as per an earlier order, to file a report on the pending cases registered under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) till June, 2024. Justice P Velmurugan issued the direction while hearing a petition filed by V Vanamamalai, a resident of an apartment in Nolambur, seeking a direction to the police to register a case on alleged caste discrimination and abuse by a member of the flat owners' association. The judge flagged the frequent showdown between the police investigation officers (IOs) and the judicial officers. 'One of the reasons is that you are not submitting closure reports in the courts if any case is closed,' he said, adding it is mandatory to report to the court forthwith if any FIR is registered or closed. Final reports are also not properly submitted in the courts, he noted. The judge directed the commissioner to file a report on the cases under the IPC till the BNSS came into force, pendency at the stage of FIR, charge sheet or not having been taken on file of the judicial magistrate courts. He gave time till July 8 for filing the report.
New Indian Express
44 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Pollachi North BDO to file case against former panchayat president for embezzlement
The collector has also directed the AD to collect Rs 6.53 lakh from the former panchayat president, as Ponnusamy did not carry out check dam construction works at the groves of two residents Nagaraj and Nithyananthan in the panchayat, sources added. Ponnusamy also released a daily wage of Rs 1.07 lakh to workers, while purchasing raw materials worth Rs 4.50 lakh by creating fake documents. The collector's order mentions that the amount was handed over to a vendor named Nataraj, but he has repaid Rs 2.09 lakh to the government. "It is the duty of the panchayat president to get approval for work being carried out under the MGNREGS during gram sabha meetings and subsequently, get administrative sanction from the district collector. The president should also maintain a proper register related to workers' attendance and release of wages. However, the explanation given by Ponnusamy after misappropriation is not acceptable," said the collector's order further said.
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Tribal family ostracised for not serving ‘handia' during last rites feast
Baripada: A tribal couple and their three children have allegedly been ostracised by the villagers for not serving 'handia' (traditional rice beer) during the last rites feast held after the death of a 67-year-old man of the family in Mayurbhanj district, police said on Monday. It is a practice in various tribal societies to serve 'handia' to people attending the feast organised as part of the last rites. It is alleged that the villagers are not allowing the family members to take water from village ponds or tubewells or purchase groceries from shops. Following a complaint lodged by the deceased man's son, a police team went to their village and asked the villagers to sort out the matter within two days or face legal action. Ram Soren of Kesapada village under Sarat police station limit died on March 27 and the members of the Santhal community observed the rituals according to tradition. Soren's son Sangram organised a community feast a month later as per tradition on April 27. However, he did not serve 'handia' in the feast to the villagers following which he, his wife Lachha and their children have allegedly been socially boycotted. In a complaint lodged at Sarat police station, Sangram and his wife charged the villagers with denying them access to water from ponds or tubewells, and even to village grocery shops. 'This is not all, the villagers also do not speak to us including my children. We are not even given work by the villagers making our life miserable,' Sangram's wife Lachha Soren told reporters. The couple has three children - a 13-year-old daughter and two sons aged 8 and 5 years. She claimed that a person spoke to them and they have been asked to pay a penalty of Rs 2,000 for violating the community's social boycott order. Asked about the reason behind not going by the tradition of serving liquor at the feast, Sangram said, 'My father was a habitual alcoholic for which he died early. We have seen tribal families getting ruined due to alcoholism. Therefore, I decided not to serve 'handia' in the feast.' Sangram, in his police complaint, named three village seniors for ostracising his family. When contacted, a priest of the Santhal community said, 'We have the tradition of offering 'handia' to the departed soul during funeral rituals. But there is no religious norm to serve it to people in the community feast. It all depends on the economic condition of the deceased person's family. They may serve 'handia' if they desire, but they cannot be forced.' 'Handia' is a traditional alcoholic rice beer popular among tribal communities in Eastern and North-Eastern India, particularly in states like Odisha, Jharkhand and West Bengal. Meanwhile, a team, headed by Sarat police station in-charge Ramakanta Patra, visited the village and discussed the matter with the villagers. 'We held a long discussion with the villagers and told them that they cannot socially ostracise any family for any reason. The police have given them two days to resolve the matter amicably,' Patra told reporters. If the matter is not resolved within the community members at the village level, the police might have to take legal action, Patra said.
