IN a 509-page order on October 29, the Madras High Court indicted the police for the February 19 violence on the court premises. It served contempt notice on four top police officers, including the then City Police Commissioner K. Radhakrishnan, and directed the government to place them under suspension pending disciplinary action. It also asked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to proceed with the probe into the cases involving the police and lawyers.
On February 17, the court complex witnessed unprecedented violence after a group of lawyers allegedly hurled rotten eggs at Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy, who had come to the court in connection with a case. Advocates had been boycotting courts across Tamil Nadu at that time in order to highlight their demands on the Sri Lankan Tamils issue.
A Division Bench comprising Justices F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla and R. Banumathi observed in their common conclusions and directions that a prima facie case is made out against Mr. Radhakrishnan; Mr. A.K. Viswanathan, then Additional Commissioner of Police (Law and Order), Chennai; Mr. Ramasubramani, then Joint Commissioner of Police (North); and Mr. Prem Anand Sinha, then Deputy Commissioner of Police, Flower Bazaar, that they have caused obstruction in the course of administration of justice and contempt proceedings have to be necessarily initiated against them.
The court ordered issuance of contempt notice under Section 15 (1) read with Section 2 (c) (iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act to these officers on several counts, including deployment of additional armed forces on the High Court premises on February 19 without the intimation/permission of the Registry after Subramanian Swamy had left the court premises around 11-30 a.m., creating commotion under the guise of attempting to arrest the accused and other advocates, entering different court rooms and the Madras High Court Advocates Association premises under the guise of chasing the lawyers, causing extensive damage to property on the campus and inflicting injuries on the then sitting judge, lawyers, court staff and the litigant public.
Other reasons cited by the court are acts of interference in the course of justice by paralysing the functioning of the High Court and the subordinate courts throughout the State on February 20, 23 and 24 and other judicial fora located on the campus on February 20, 23 and 27, and the failure to withdraw the additional armed forces despite specific and repeated directions of the then acting Chief Justice.
However, the court maintained that no case was made out to initiate contempt proceedings against the Chief Secretary, the Home Secretary, the Director-General of Police and the then Additional Director-General of Police (Law and Order).
Although no prima facie contempt case is made out against 12 other police officers in the criminal case, they should be proceeded against in accordance with the law and also by way of disciplinary proceedings if they are charged with committing excesses in the February 19 incident, the order said.
The court, through a direction, asked the State government to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the four police officers, as they are responsible for the incident in the High Court campus on February 19 and the police excesses in violation of statutory provisions including Police Standing Orders. It asked the government to exercise its discretion to place them under suspension pending disciplinary action to enable a fair and unbiased inquiry. It asked the CBI to proceed with the investigation in the cases against the lawyers and the police expeditiously and file the final report within three months.
The Bench said that the lawyers had to shed the impression that they were a law unto themselves and restore the glory of the profession and their own public image. We hope that there will be no strike/call for boycott hereafter, the order said. The court also directed that there shall be no procession or meetings on the court verandah or in any part of the premises except within the halls of the association, and that too in a peaceful manner in order to ensure that the proceedings of the court were not disrupted in any way.
The court stressed the need to restore security at the various courts in the State as it existed before February 17. It urged the government to earmark Rs.58.25 lakh for the disbursement of ex gratia to the injured lawyers, court staff and others, and for the payment of damages to the Law Association and the Madras High Court Advocates Association.
Both the lawyers and the police, the two wings of the institution, should always work together for the administration of justice, it opined.
S. DorairajCOMMents
COMMents
SHARE