HC rejects IAS officer's plea seeking discharge in wealth case

The Madras High Court today upheld a CBI court order which ruled that no prior sanction was required from an IAS officer's parent cadre state for prosecution in a corruption case.
Justice M. Venugopal made the observation while dismissing a criminal revision petition by IAS officer and former Chairman of Chennai Port Trust K.Suresh seeking setting aside of the March 25 last order of Additional Special Judge for CBI cases rejecting his discharge petition in a wealth case.
CBI has filed a criminal case against Suresh, who belonged to Madhya Pradesh cadre, and his wife for allegedly amassing wealth while in the service of the central government.

The Union Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions had on March 26, 2012 accorded sanction under the Prevention of Corruption Act for prosecuting the officer.
A discharge petition was filed by the officer on the ground that prior sanction order of the state of Madya Pradesh was essential for his prosecution. But the CBI court dismissed his plea following which he moved the high court.
"This Court comes to a prima facie irresistible conclusion that the investigation was carried out in respect of the period while K.Suresh was in service of Food Corporation of India and Chennai Port Trust," the Bench said.

Also at the time of "amassment" of wealth, he was in the service of the central government and not in Madhya Pradesh.

"There is no requirement of the state government of Madhya Pradesh to grant consent under section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, as opined by this court, the Bench said.
At the time of framing charges, a court only has to take into account the prima facie materials available on record for the purpose of proceeding further against the accused.
The Judge further said that in the present case, the "offenses" investigated by CBI were not committed within the state of Madhya Pradesh and as such there was no need for CBI to obtain prior permission from that state government for prosecuting the officer and dismissed the criminal revision petition.

The Judge also dismissed the criminal revision petition filed by the third accused Venkataraja, who is alleged to have played a crucial role in helping the officer in parking his unaccounted money with an approver in the case, seeking discharge.