The Madras High Court on Tuesday asserted that a CBI probe cannot be ordered as a matter of course based solely on a litigant's subjective belief, dismissing a plea seeking investigation into alleged irregularities in the resignation of four AIADMK MLAs who subsequently joined the ruling TVK.
Court's Observation on Political Realignment
The first bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan stated that while a sudden shift in political loyalty by MLAs may cause financial strain due to by-elections, such political choices do not automatically constitute criminal misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption Act without proof of an unlawful quid pro quo.
Petitioner's Allegations
Petitioner B Ramkumar Adityan argued that the MLAs, having spent up to Rs 40 lakh in election campaigns, could not have surrendered their legislative positions days after taking oath unless induced by illicit gratification or promises of executive office.
The court refused to concur, emphasizing that pleadings in a PIL targeting public dignitaries must possess high precision and be backed by relevant material obtained through research, not speculative hypotheses.
Need for Foundational Facts
When the court queried about supporting documents, the petitioner only referred to Supreme Court decisions. The judges noted that legal precedents are authorities for propositions of law and do not substitute for foundational facts that a petitioner must establish within pleadings.
