Supreme Court Stays Money-Laundering Trial Against Former CSI Bishop in Medical College Bribery Case

The Supreme Court in A Dharmaraj Rasalam v. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement has put a temporary halt on the money-laundering trial against former Church of South India (CSI) Bishop A Dharmaraj Rasalam in the alleged Karakonam CSI Medical College bribery case. The Court has also sought the Enforcement Directorate’s response.

A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta issued notice on Rasalam’s petition seeking to quash the case. The notice is returnable in four weeks, and until then, the trial before the PMLA Special Court will remain stayed.

During the hearing, Justice Nath questioned why a religious leader would be involved in such allegations. Senior Advocate Dr S Muralidhar, appearing for Rasalam, argued that the money-laundering case cannot continue since the “predicate offences” themselves have been closed. He pointed out that the Crime Branch had already filed five closure reports, and surprisingly, the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) even annexed two of these closure reports.

Rasalam’s petition challenges the Kerala High Court’s March 24 order, which had refused to quash the ED chargesheet. The High Court had held that the case should proceed before the Special PMLA Court.

The allegations relate to events from 2019, when Rasalam and others were accused of collecting more than ₹7 crore from parents by promising admissions to MBBS and postgraduate seats at Karakonam CSI Medical College. Several parents complained that money was taken on the pretext of guaranteed seats, but the admissions never materialised.

The Crime Branch investigated the matter and, in 2021, filed a final report before the magistrate stating that the allegations were false and motivated. Despite this, the ED pursued its money-laundering probe, which Rasalam now seeks to challenge before the Supreme Court.

At the end of the hearing, the Bench shared a lighthearted exchange. When Justice Nath remarked, “Don’t do all this,” Justice Mehta jokingly replied, “If they don’t do all this, who will engage Supreme Court lawyers?”

The case is listed as:

Case No.: Diary No. 28457/2025
Case Title: A Dharmaraj Rasalam v. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement