The Hindu : Tamil Nadu / Chennai News : Agriculture Minister unnecessarily impleaded in case: High Court

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Oct 25, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu - Chennai

Agriculture Minister unnecessarily impleaded in case: High Court

Special Correspondent

“Mere allegations cannot be taken as gospel truth in the absence of any material”

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Friday said that a detenu, who filed a habeas corpus petition (HCP), has unnecessarily impleaded Agriculture Minister Veerapandi S. Arumugam to the proceedings. The Minister seemed to have nothing to do with the entire episode.

Poomozhi alias K.A.Mohammed Ibrahim, State president, Tamil Nadu Human Rights Movement, Salem, filed the HCP for a direction to authorities for producing the detenu, Raju, Salem district secretary of the movement, before the court, and setting him at liberty.

The detenu’s case was that he made some attempts to expose a land grabbing issue at Narasothipatti, Rettiyur village, within the limits of the Salem Corporation, and, in the process, incurred the wrath of his opponents and thus apprehended danger to his life.

When the matter came up before a Division Bench, comprising Justices Elipe Dharma Rao and S. Tamilvanan, Mr. Raju himself appeared before the court and filed an affidavit stating that owing to threat to his life, he left his native place and after seeing a newspaper report about the filing of the HCP, he was appearing before the court.

He sought protection to his life.

The Public Prosecutor (PP), Raja Elango, submitted that the detenu was an accused in a criminal case registered by the Suramangalam police station. If he were left free, there was every possibility of his evading the law. The PP requested the court to direct the detenu to surrender before the jurisdictional court or a court in Chennai.

Petitioner’s counsel, R.Narayanan, submitted that Mr. Raju was ready to surrender before the Suramangalam police station.

In its order dismissing the petition, the Bench said the petitioner had impleaded the Minister making certain allegations against him.

Except the allegations, no material had been placed before the Bench to entertain the plea raised by the detenu.

Mere allegations could not be taken as gospel truth in the absence of any material.

The Bench said that since the detenu had apprehended fear to his life, it considered it appropriate to direct the detenu to surrender before the VII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, before the raising of the magistrate court for judicial custody. After his surrender, it was left to the magistrate to pass appropriate orders.

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

Tamil Nadu