HC deplores police dharna, accepts apology

Contempt petition against 90 personnel in Puducherry

May 02, 2014 01:01 am | Updated 01:01 am IST - CHENNAI

Policemen staging a dharna in a court complex is a disturbing trend in society. Those entrusted with the task of enforcing law, themselves were instrumental in breaking law and order.

This is what the Madras High Court has observed in its order on a petition about suo motu contempt against nearly 90 police personnel who staged a dharna on the premises of the District and Sessions Court, Puducherry on December 19, 2008.

However, the First Bench comprising the Acting Chief Justice, Satish K. Agnihotri, and Justice K. K. Sasidharan accepted the unconditional apology tendered by the police personnel and closed the contempt proceedings with a warning that such things should not recur.

Trouble started after a Sub-Inspector of Orleanpet police station, Sreedharan, was denied bail by a Special Judge. He was arrested by the CBI’s Anti-Corruption wing, Chennai unit. Protesting the denial of bail to their colleague, policemen raised slogans and used derogatory language against the Special Judge. The agitating policemen even lathicharged photo journalists who took pictures of the protest. Some journalists were injured and their cameras destroyed. The agitators even refused to obey the orders of their superiors, including Inspector-General of Police.

The Special Judge (CBI cases) submitted a detailed report to the High Court. Following this, suo motu contempt proceedings were initiated against the policemen who were involved. Even though there were about 200 police personnel who were involved, only 92 could be identified.

The Bench observed that sit-ins and shouting slogans against the Judge were all intimidating tactics to exert pressure on him which could not be countenanced. It was rather astonishing that the police did not obey even the Inspector-General of Police’s direction.

Since the policemen tendered an unconditional apology, the Bench said, it was taking a lenient view of the matter. The Bench quashed a Union Territory G.O. of December 26, 2008 appointing a Commission of Inquiry to go into the incident, without consulting the High Court.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.