The Madras High Court on Wednesday (23 April 2025) upheld the validity of the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) raids conducted at the headquarters of the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) between 6 March and 8 March 2025. The raids were part of an investigation into alleged money laundering involving over ₹1,000 crores.
A Bench comprising Justices SM Subramaniam and K Rajasekar dismissed petitions filed by the Tamil Nadu government and TASMAC, which had challenged the legality of the ED’s actions and accused the central agency of political overreach.
In its verdict, the Court granted the ED full liberty to continue its probe under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), stating that the judiciary cannot become a participant in political disputes.
“Whether a court can go and examine if political forces are at play or be a partaker in the political game? Definitely not. That is not the duty of the court of law. Are courts the place to decide this?“ the Court observed.
The Bench firmly rejected the argument that the ED raids were politically motivated, stating, “We can only see the materials before us, the offence committed, irrespective of whether it is party A or B, and apply the law and ensure justice is served.”
It added that questions regarding political motivations are best left to public opinion: “The right place to place this submission is before the people of this country… they witness the actions of the people in power and so the best judges to decide the (question of whether it is a matter of politics) is the people of our great nation.”
Addressing concerns about the impact of the raids on TASMAC employees, the Court acknowledged the inconvenience caused but emphasized the larger goal of economic justice.
“The offence of money laundering is a crime against people of nation… employees sent home at odd hours highly disproportionate… (but) search conducted in benefit of nation… a few inconveniences, when equated against (economic justice)… legislations such as PMLA serve this purpose (economic justice) ….“ the judgment noted.
The ED launched the raids following allegations of widespread financial misconduct within TASMAC, including overpricing of liquor, manipulation of tenders, and bribery. The agency cited over 40 FIRs previously filed by the State or TASMAC itself as the basis for suspicion of money laundering.
Senior Advocates Vikram Chaudhary and Vikas Singh represented TASMAC, while the State was represented by Advocate General PS Raman. The ED’s case was argued by Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who denied allegations of harassment and insisted the searches were lawful and necessary.
The matter was originally heard by Justices MS Ramesh and N Senthilkumar, who had expressed concern over claims that TASMAC staff were detained for over 60 hours. The Bench later recused itself, prompting the case to be reassigned.
A plea by the State government to transfer the case to the Supreme Court was later withdrawn after the apex court indicated it was not inclined to entertain the request.
(With inputs from Bar and Bench)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.