Madras High Court orders registry to list plea seeking FIR against TVK Chief Vijay for ‘suppressing’ income

The plea before the Madras High Court accused Vijay and seeks a probe into the “suppression of income, receipt of unaccounted cash remuneration and concealment of financial transactions disclosed in the course of the search and statutory proceedings”.

A bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan was acting on the plea of one M Rajkumar, who sought directions to “appropriate law enforcement authorities” to register an FIR

The April 8 Madras High Court order recorded the one prayers in the plea as saying, “..to direct the respondents 1 (Director General of Income Tax (Investigation) & 2 (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) to place the materials gathered during the search, assessment and penalty proceedings before the competent authorities under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, for the purpose of examining the existence of a scheduled predicate offence and “proceeds of crime” within the meaning of Sections 2(1)(u) and 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and to take appropriate steps for investigation in accordance with the provisions of the said Act.”

The plea added, “Issue a writ of mandamus to direct the appropriate law enforcement authorities to register a First Information Report and conduct investigation into the commission of cognizable offences under the Indian Penal Code, including but not limited to Sections 420, 467, 470, 471 and 120B of IPC, in relation to the suppression of income, receipt of unaccounted cash remuneration and concealment of financial transactions disclosed in the course of the search and statutory proceedings.”

The issue arose after the Madras High Court Registry refused to number the case. The Madras High Court, however, referred to a Supreme Court precedent to note that the “Registry could not have exercised the power to decide on maintainability of a case, as it is a judicial function in the realm of the Court and directed the Registry to number the case and post before the Court”.

Case of seeking FIR for ‘suppressing’ income

The petitioner, M Rajkumar, approached the Madras High Court seeking mandamus to compel tax authorities to examine materials from search proceedings conducted under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against Vijay.

The petition sought the initiation of prosecution against the third respondent (Vijay) for alleged tax evasion under Section 276C (wilful attempt to evade tax), as well as the registration of an FIR for cognisable offences under the IPC, including Section 420 (cheating) and Section 467 (forgery).

The petitioner requested that evidence of proceeds of crime be placed before authorities under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.

The matter reached the bench before numbering because the Registry had refused to number the case, raising doubts regarding its maintainability.

Court’s order

“In view of the decision of the Apex Court, the directions and circular already issued, we hereby direct the Registry not to refuse to number any case raising the issue of maintainability,” the Madras High Court stated.

The court held that the Registry is only bound to scrutinise the “orderliness” of case papers. If papers are in order but maintainability is in doubt, the Registry must number the case with an endorsement “number subject to maintainability”, and list the matter separately before the roster judge under a caption “for maintainability”.

The order clarified that it is for the court to decide on the maintainability of the case, and if found maintainable, then to consider the case on the merits.

The bench expressed “surprise” that the Registry continued this practice despite a grievance redressal committee resolution and a subsequent circular issued in August 2025, which explicitly directed the Registry not to refuse numbering on maintainability grounds.

Vijay stakes claim in Tamil Nadu, Governor says show me the numbers

TVK chief Vijay’s path to becoming Tamil Nadu’s next Chief Minister hit an unexpected pause on Wednesday after Governor Rajendra Arlekar insisted that the party produce documentary proof of majority support before any invitation to form the government, The Indian Express has learnt.