Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection from Arrest to V Senthil Balaji in TASMAC Corruption Case

July 31, 2026 : The Supreme Court on Friday granted interim protection from arrest to former Tamil Nadu Minister and DMK MLA V. Senthil Balaji in connection with a corruption case relating to alleged irregularities in the functioning of the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC).

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi stayed Balaji’s arrest while issuing notice on his appeal challenging the Madras High Court’s order rejecting his anticipatory bail plea. The Court directed Balaji to fully cooperate with the investigation, surrender his passport and refrain from influencing witnesses until further orders.

The matter was initially listed before a three-judge Bench consisting of CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana. However, Justice Mohana recused herself from hearing the case, after which the matter was heard by the remaining two judges.

The case arises from an FIR registered by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) against Balaji and six others over alleged irregularities in liquor procurement, transport contracts, grant of bar licences and other administrative decisions within TASMAC between 2021 and 2025. Balaji served as Tamil Nadu’s Minister for Prohibition and Excise during part of the period under investigation.

Following registration of the FIR, the DVAC conducted searches at more than 40 locations across Tamil Nadu, including Balaji’s residence in Karur and premises linked to his former associates and other accused persons.

Besides Balaji, the FIR names former TASMAC Managing Director S. Visakan, former regional managers T. Ramadurai Murugan and R. Panneerselvam, Balaji’s former personal assistant Bhaskar, alleged middleman Rathesh Raj Shanmugavel and S. Karthik.

According to the investigating agency, bar licence tenders were manipulated through cartelisation, proxy ownership and the use of consecutively numbered demand drafts. The DVAC has alleged that Rathesh Raj exercised significant influence over TASMAC’s functioning, including liquor brand approvals, transfer of officials and allotment of bar licences, with former Managing Director Visakan allegedly acting on directions originating from Balaji.

The agency has also alleged that certain distilleries generated unaccounted cash by inflating invoices relating to used liquor bottles and paid kickbacks to TASMAC officials in return for favourable supply orders. Additionally, investigators claim that several TASMAC outlets collected amounts above the maximum retail price, charging customers between ₹10 and ₹100 extra for various liquor brands and up to ₹500 more for foreign liquor.

Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan of the Madras High Court had rejected Balaji’s anticipatory bail application on July 30, leading him to challenge the order before the Supreme Court.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Balaji, argued that the prosecution’s stand had substantially changed following the change of government in Tamil Nadu after the recent Assembly elections and submitted that even the State’s Additional Secretary had altered his position.

Opposing the plea, Senior Advocate Guru Krishnakumar, appearing for the Tamil Nadu government, argued that the case involved a large-scale corruption scam worth hundreds of crores and that custodial interrogation could become necessary. He also contended that Balaji faced multiple criminal cases and there was a possibility of evidence being tampered with.

During the hearing, Chief Justice Surya Kant stressed the importance of ensuring a fair and impartial investigation, observing that if the allegations were ultimately proved, the accused would have to answer for his conduct. When the State raised concerns about the need for custodial interrogation, Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the State would be free to approach the Court if such a situation arose.

The Bench further assured that Balaji would cooperate with the investigation and not interfere with the probe, while granting liberty to the State to seek appropriate directions in the event of any violation. The Court accordingly stayed Balaji’s arrest pending further consideration of his anticipatory bail plea.