Date:15/05/2005 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2005/05/15/stories/2005051503550400.htm

Tamil Nadu

Directive to High Court on Lexus car import case

J. Venkatesan

`Petitioner can approach vacation Bench'

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday directed the Madras High Court to dispose of by August 30, a revision petition filed by M. Natarajan (husband of Sasikala) seeking to discharge himself from the Lexus car import case pending before a CBI special court.

A Bench comprising, Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justice Tarun Chatterjee, passed this order on a writ petition filed by Mr. Natarajan seeking stay of the special court trial till the revision petition was disposed of by the High Court.

Senior counsel K. Subramaniam brought to the court's notice that three High Court judges had declined to hear the matter and pleaded for a stay.

Appearing for the CBI, Additional Solicitor-General Amarendra Saran opposed the grant of stay and said if the petitioner had any grievance he should only approach the High Court.

The Bench said the petitioner could approach the vacation Bench of the High Court, which would consider grant of interim stay of the trial pending before the special court.

The petitioner, who was Director of Tamilarasi Publication Pvt Ltd and V. Bhaskaran, authorised signatory of the company to operate the account with the Indian Bank, issued a foreign inward remittance certificate from the current account of the publications.

This certificate was utilised by S. Balakrishnan and his son, Yogesh Balakrishnan for getting customs clearance for the car.

He said the importer Balakrishnan availed the Kar Vivad Samadan Scheme, 1998, and paid Rs. 2,84,325.

Thereby all criminal liability had been wiped off. The petitioner filed a petition seeking discharge from the case, but the special court dismissed it. Thereafter he filed a revision.

Counsel Subramaniam submitted that the grievance of the petitioner was that three High Court judges, one after another declined to hear the matter. As a result the vacation court was also not entertaining the petition. Hence, he prayed for stay till the disposal of the revision petition.