Senthilbalaji moves Madras HC for anticipatory bail in ₹35 crore horse-trading case
Synopsis
Senior DMK leader V. Senthilbalaji has moved the Madras High Court for anticipatory bail in a ₹35 crore horse-trading case, where police allege he orchestrated a bribe offer to a TVK MLA to vote against the Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker. Senthilbalaji says there is zero forensic or documentary evidence linking him — and that the case is political targeting.
Key Takeaways
Senthilbalaji , former Tamil Nadu minister and senior DMK leader, has filed an anticipatory bail plea before the Madras High Court .
The case involves an alleged offer of ₹35 crore to TVK MLA N.
Elaiyaraja to vote against the Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker.
Complainant Elaiyaraja also alleged he received threats after refusing the offer.
Police added Senthilbalaji as an accused after alleging that intermediary Thirunavukkarasu acted at his instance, along with his brother Ashok Kumar .
Senthilbalaji denies all involvement, citing absence of any call records, financial trail, or forensic evidence.
Ilanthiraiyan is scheduled to hear the plea on 8 July .
Former Tamil Nadu minister and senior Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader V. Senthilbalaji has approached the Madras High Court seeking anticipatory bail in the alleged ₹35 crore horse-trading case, contending that the charges against him are politically motivated and unsupported by credible evidence. Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan is scheduled to hear the plea on Wednesday, 8 July.
Background: How the Case Arose
The case originates from a complaint filed by Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) MLA N. Elaiyaraja, who represents the Uthangarai Assembly constituency in Krishnagiri district. On 29 June, Elaiyaraja approached the Chennai Police Commissioner, alleging that he had been offered ₹35 crore to vote against the Speaker during a proposed resolution in the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly.
According to the complaint, a person named Thirunavukkarasu, who claimed to be associated with a survey organisation, contacted the MLA by phone and stated he was acting on behalf of 'some people from an important party.' When Elaiyaraja refused and ended the call, Thirunavukkarasu allegedly called again, repeated the offer, and threatened both the legislator and his family with serious consequences if he disclosed the conversation.
Police Findings and Charges
The Triplicane police registered a case under Sections 8 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, along with Sections 61(2)(a) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). During investigation, police alleged that Thirunavukkarasu had contacted the MLA at the instance of V. Senthilbalaji and another accused, Ashok Kumar, identified as Senthilbalaji's brother. Senthilbalaji was subsequently added as an accused in the case.
Senthilbalaji's Defence
In his anticipatory bail petition, Senthilbalaji has strongly denied any involvement in the alleged conspiracy. His petition asserts that the investigation has produced no material linking him to the bribery attempt or the threats — no call detail records, WhatsApp messages, voice recordings, electronic communications, CCTV footage, tower location data, financial transactions, money trail, documentary evidence, recoveries, or independent witnesses.
He further argued that proceeding to arrest him without objective evidence would amount to 'arrest first and search for evidence later,' which he contended is contrary to established legal principles. Senthilbalaji has also claimed the case is the product of political vendetta, initiated with a mala fide intention to target him.
What Happens Next
The Madras High Court is expected to consider these submissions when the anticipatory bail plea is heard on 8 July. The outcome will determine whether Senthilbalaji — who has previously faced legal scrutiny, including an arrest in a money laundering case in 2023 — can secure protection from arrest while the investigation continues. The case has added fresh political tension to Tamil Nadu's legislative landscape, coming amid broader debates over floor management and MLA allegiance in the state.
Point of View
Where floor management and MLA loyalty have become live fault lines. Senthilbalaji's defence — that no forensic trail connects him — is legally significant, but the fact that police added him as an accused after investigation, rather than at the complaint stage, suggests investigators believe they have at least a prima facie basis. What the Madras High Court decides on anticipatory bail will signal how seriously the judiciary views the evidentiary threshold at this stage. For the DMK, the case is an unwanted distraction; for the TVK and opposition, it is a ready-made narrative about ruling-party overreach — regardless of how the facts ultimately land.
NationPress
7 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the ₹35 crore horse-trading case against V. Senthilbalaji?
The case stems from a complaint by TVK MLA N. Elaiyaraja, who alleged on 29 June that he was offered ₹35 crore to vote against the Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker during a proposed resolution. Police subsequently named Senthilbalaji as an accused, alleging the bribe offer was made at his instance through an intermediary named Thirunavukkarasu.
Why has Senthilbalaji approached the Madras High Court?
Senthilbalaji has filed an anticipatory bail petition to secure protection from arrest while the investigation is ongoing. He argues the case is politically motivated and that no credible evidence — including call records, financial transactions, or witness testimony — links him to the alleged offence.
When will the Madras High Court hear the anticipatory bail plea?
Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan is scheduled to hear the anticipatory bail petition on Wednesday, 8 July.
Who filed the original complaint and what did it allege?
TVK MLA N. Elaiyaraja, who represents the Uthangarai Assembly constituency in Krishnagiri district, filed the complaint with the Chennai Police Commissioner. He alleged that an intermediary contacted him by phone, offered ₹35 crore to switch his vote, and threatened him and his family after he refused.
Under which laws has the case been registered?
The Triplicane police registered the case under Sections 8 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Sections 61(2)(a) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), covering bribery and criminal intimidation.
