The Hindu : Nadar group moves NHRC for probe into Pannaiyar's death

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Nov 26, 2003

Southern States

Southern States - Tamil Nadu

Nadar group moves NHRC for probe into Pannaiyar's death

By Our Legal Correspondent

NEW DELHI NOV.25. A group of Nadars today moved the National Human Rights Commission, alleging that human rights were violated in the September 26 encounter death in Chennai of Venkatesa Pannaiyar, belonging to the community.

The complainants, including R. Danushkodi Adhithan, former Union Minister; A.D.K. Jeyaseelan, MP; Nellai Nedumaran, president, Indian Nadar Kootuamaippu; and C. Periyasamy, president, Nellai Thoothukudi Nadar Sangam, said Tamil Nadu, in particular Chennai, had witnessed a spate of encounter deaths in the last two years. Since April 2002, 11 encounter deaths had occurred — eight of them directly under the jurisdiction of the then City Police Commissioner, K. Vijay Kumar.

Venkatesa Pannaiyar, who hailed from an affluent family, was shot dead by the city police, who "took the law into their own hands as they conceived that he should be eliminated."

Without following Cr.P.C. procedures and apex court guidelines, the team led by Mr. Vijay Kumar barged into his house in the early hours and without provocation shot him dead.

Alleging that the police act was in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution and that the encounter amounted to deliberate murder, the complaint sought a probe by the NHRC or the CBI and a detailed report from the State Government and the city police, and demanded that penal action be initiated against the police responsible for the death of Pannaiyar.

SC stays arrest

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has stayed the arrest of Jai Ganesh, an auditor, who was alleged to have engaged Pannaiyar to recover money due to him from an industrialist.

A Bench comprising Justice Y.K. Sabharwal and Justice B.N. Agarwal passed the order on a special leave petition filed by Mr. Jai Ganesh against a Madras High Court order rejecting his plea for anticipatory bail. The High Court had directed him to turn himself in before the police, who were asked to arrest him on surrender.

Mr. Ganesh said that while dismissing the anticipatory bail application, no direction could be issued to the Commissioner of Police to arrest the petitioner.

Accepting the submission, the Bench issued notice to the State Government and the police. In case of arrest, the arresting officer should release the petitioner on his furnishing a surety and giving an undertaking that he would comply with the provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Southern States