Ponmudy case: HC judge not to recuse

CHENNAI: Refusing to recuse himself from further hearing the revision petition initiated suo motu against Minister K Ponmudy over his acquittal from a disproportionate assets case, Justice Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court said such suo motu revisions are exercised to ensure that the streams of criminal justice were not subverted and remain pure and unsullied.

After directing the registry to furnish the materials it relied upon while initiating the action against the State and the accused, the judge posted it for further hearing on October 9.

The revision petitions he initiated suo motu in recent weeks, seen in some quarters as a “witch-hunt spearheaded by one judge”, are exercised not by one judge but by the High Court as an institution, Justice Venkatesh said rejecting the plea for recusal. “The orders resonate the voice of not any individual judge but one institution,” he said.

If the State was aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused by the special court as it claims to be, the option to appeal was still alive, he pointed out.

Referring to the contention that the court violated Section 401(2) of CrPC by not giving an opportunity to the accused to be heard, he said only the exercise of powers without hearing has been prohibited. He did not pass any order “under Section 401” but only called for the records under Section 397(1).

The judge also struck down the DVAC’s contention that the HC registry must be impleaded. Noting that the administrative side has not come before him to complain or request it be heard, he said it was rather strange that the DVAC or the accused should be holding candles for the court administration, which is perfectly capable of defending itself if the need arises.

The State’s allegation of bias and prejudice was also “very strange and curious”, as it is also claiming to be an aggrieved party against the special court order and that it was contemplating filing an appeal.

“It is, therefore, a mystery as to why the mighty State is shooting a plea of bias at this court from the shoulders of the accused,” the judge said.

On August 10, Justice Venkatesh had taken up suo motu proceedings against the order passed by the Principal District Judge, Vellore, in June acquitting Ponmudy and his wife Visalatchi from all charges in a DA case. But senior counsel Siddharth Luthra who appeared for the DVAC and senior counsel NR Elango (for Ponmudy) objected to the judge hearing the case further. Elango cited CrPC Section 190(c) to contend that a judge initiating suo motu proceedings should not hear the matter.