Published Nov 12, 2026 | 5:22 PM ⚊ Updated Nov 12, 2026 | 5:22 PM
The cases relate to allegations of fraud in recruitment to the Tamil Nadu Transport Department during the AIADMK regime.
Synopsis: A special court in Chennai on Thursday warned that it would not allow delays in the trial of the alleged transport department job scam involving former Tamil Nadu Minister V Senthil Balaji and more than 2,200 others. The court said the bail granted to the accused could be cancelled if they continued filing discharge petitions without following the prescribed timeline.
A special court in Chennai on Thursday, 12 November warned that it would not allow any attempts to delay the trial in the alleged transport department job scam involving former Tamil Nadu Transport Minister V Senthil Balaji and more than 2,200 others.
The court also warned that the bail granted to the accused could be cancelled if they continued filing discharge petitions without adhering to a prescribed timeline.
The cases relate to allegations of fraud in recruitment to the Tamil Nadu Transport Department during the AIADMK regime between 2011 and 2015. The Central Crime Branch (CCB) police registered cases in 2018, alleging that money was collected from candidates in exchange for securing government jobs.
Three cases were registered against more than 2,200 people, including former Minister Senthil Balaji and his brother Ashok Kumar, in connection with the alleged recruitment irregularities.
The cases came up for hearing on Thursday before Judge N Lokeshwaran of the Special Court for cases involving MPs and MLAs, located on the premises of the Chennai District Collectorate. The hearing was held in connection with the framing of charges.
Also Read: Tamil Nadu and Puducherry draft electoral rolls released; voters get one month to verify details
Senthil Balaji, his brother Ashok Kumar and other accused appeared before the court in person.
During the proceedings, the judge expressed displeasure over the accused seeking discharge from the cases through separate petitions filed one after another.
The judge said the court could not entertain a situation in which every accused filed individual petitions seeking discharge, thereby prolonging the proceedings. He directed the accused to file their discharge petitions within a specified period and inform the court when they intended to submit them.
The judge further warned that the court would not permit any unnecessary attempt to delay the trial.
He cautioned that if the accused continued filing discharge petitions at their convenience without adhering to the court’s directions, their bail could be cancelled.
The judge subsequently questioned Senthil Balaji, Ashok Kumar and the other accused present in court about when they intended to file their petitions seeking discharge from the cases.
Responding to the question, Senthil Balaji’s side informed the court that they would file the discharge petitions shortly.
(Edited by Dese Gowda with inputs from Subash Chandra Bose)
