English
English
English
The hearing has raised tough questions over delays in filing an FIR against Minister K.N. Nehru in a ₹634 crore recruitment scam, putting focus on legal procedures and accountability in corruption cases.
Madras HC questions delay in FIR against K N Nehru
Chennai: The Madras High Court has raised serious concerns over the delay in registering a case against Tamil Nadu minister K. N. Nehru in connection with alleged recruitment irregularities.
During a recent hearing, the court questioned why its earlier directive to immediately file a case had not been implemented by the Anti-Corruption Department.
Dhurandhar 2 Faces Trouble In Tamil Nadu; Ban Plea Filed In Madras HC Ahead Of TN Elections
The issue stems from allegations flagged by the Enforcement Directorate, which had written to the state police last October. The agency claimed that around ₹634 crore was allegedly collected as bribes for securing 2,538 jobs in municipal administration.
These claims triggered legal action and intensified political scrutiny around the recruitment process.
The matter reached court after Inbathurai, a Member of Parliament from the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, filed a petition seeking the registration of a criminal case against the minister and others.
On February 20, the High Court directed the Anti-Corruption Department to register a case without delay. However, alleging non-compliance with this order, the petitioner later moved a contempt of court plea.
At the hearing, senior advocate N. R. Elango argued that under the Prevention of Corruption Act, prior government sanction is required before initiating a case against a public servant.
The bench, however, questioned whether such approval was necessary even after a judicial order explicitly directing the registration of a case.
Madras High Court orders arrest of Panama-flagged ship MV Zhong Peng You Yi
In response to the court’s queries, the Advocate General informed that a review petition has been filed challenging the earlier order mandating the FIR.
The development indicates that the state government is seeking legal clarity on procedural requirements before proceeding further.
The High Court has adjourned the matter to April 20, when it is expected to examine both the contempt plea and the review petition. The case remains under close watch, as it raises broader questions about accountability, legal procedure, and the enforcement of court directives in corruption-related matters.
