CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Friday dismissed a plea seeking a CBI probe into the alleged attempt to poach a TVK MLA, holding that newspaper reports and social media posts cannot form the basis for transferring a statutory criminal investigation.
The First Bench of the Madras High Court, comprising Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan, dismissed a public interest litigation seeking transfer of the investigation into the alleged attempt to poach a TVK MLA from the Triplicane Police to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The Bench observed that the petitioner had relied heavily on newspaper reports, press releases, and social media audio and video clips to contend that "horse-trading" was taking place and that other complaints were being ignored. The court emphasised that newspaper reports and social media broadcasts cannot form the basis for directing the transfer of a criminal investigation. It further observed that a court of law cannot order the transfer of a statutory investigation based on newspaper headlines or viral videos circulating on digital platforms.
The court further observed that the State police had already apprehended nine accused, collected material evidence, and secured their judicial remand. It held that invoking the court's extraordinary jurisdiction to seek transfer of the investigation solely on the basis of unverified media reports amounted to a clear deviation from the purpose of such jurisdiction. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.
The petition was filed by Tirupur-based advocate J Balasubramani, seeking transfer of the investigation into the case registered by the Triplicane Police over the alleged attempt to poach a TVK MLA from Uthangarai to the CBI.
The petitioner contended that the FIR ought to have been registered by the Uthangarai Police, as the alleged offence was stated to have occurred within its territorial jurisdiction. He alleged that registration of the case at the D1 Triplicane Police Station in Chennai was driven by political convenience rather than territorial jurisdiction.
The petition further stated that, under the DVAC manual, the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) is the competent agency to investigate offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and to inquire into complaints relating to bribery, corruption, and allied misconduct by public servants.
The petitioner sought transfer of the investigation from the Triplicane Police to the CBI for a fresh, comprehensive, and independent probe. He contended that the case involved allegations affecting the integrity of the democratic process and therefore warranted an independent investigation. The plea also sought an interim stay on the ongoing investigation into the alleged attempt to bribe the TVK MLA.
During the hearing, Advocate General Vijay Narayan submitted that the State police had promptly taken cognisance of the offence and arrested nine individuals. He submitted that the investigation was supported by strong evidence, including audio and video recordings, and that several key accused had been remanded to judicial custody.
He further submitted that the investigation was progressing at an impressive pace and that, based on the petitioner's unverified assertions, there was no justification for transferring the investigation to the CBI at this stage.