Madras High Court confirms jail term for Natarajan in Lexus car case

CHENNAI: In a major setback to M. Natarajan, husband of jailed AIADMK leader V.K. Sasikala, the Madras high court on Friday has confirmed a trial court verdict sentencing him to two years in prison in connection with illegal import of a luxury car from the United Kingdom over two decades ago. Legal experts said Natarajan has time till Saturday afternoon to surrender before the lower court and thereafter seek bail on health grounds. Besides Natarajan, the high court also confirmed the sentencing of his nephew V. Bhaskaran Yogesh Balakrishnan, a resident of London, and Sujaritha Sundararajan, manager of Indian Bank, Abhiramapuram Branch, Chennai.

A trial court had in 2010 sentenced Natarajan and others to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and imposed a fine of Rs. 40,000 on Yogesh Balakrishnan and Rs 20,000 each on Natarajan, Bhaskaran and Sundararajan. When the appeal of the accused came up for hearing, Justice G. Jayachandran said there was ample evidence placed before the court by the prosecution to show that these accused have involved in cheating the government by producing forged documents.

“The Lexus car with engine capacity of 3000 cc, which is not in compliance with the residence transfer provision, has been imported with fabricated documents. The provision clearly restricts the import of car above 1600 cc by Indian nationals or foreign nationals of Indian origin coming to India for permanent settlement, Unless the importer has stayed abroad continuously for a period of at least two years and had used the car at least for one year before the date of import,” the judge said on Friday.

According to the prosecution, a Toyota Lexus car was imported in 1994 declaring by Natarajan declaring it as “used vehicle of 1993 model” evading tax to the tune of '1.06 crore. The CBI and enforcement directorate registered separate cases against Natarajan, V. Bhaskaran, Yogesh Bala Krishnan and Sujaritha Sundararajan — who substituted the original sale invoice with a photocopy of an invoice fabricated by changing the vehicle's manufacturing date to July 1993.
 “It is unfortunate that senior customs officers who were the members of the conspiracy were not prosecuted, since the prosecuting agency was refused sanction by competent authority. This cannot be the reason to allow the other conspirators to go scot-free. This court opines that this is high time to revisit law mandating sanction under Prevention of Corruption Act, and subject it to judicial scrutiny,” the judge said.

The judge further said refusal to accord sanction should also be subject to judicial scrutiny so that improper exercise of power by unscrupulous person shielding his subordinate shall be averted. Dismissing the appeal, the judge has directed the trial court to secure the accused and remand to judicial custody to undergo remaining period of sentence if any.