Muthukaruppan apologises to High Court

By A. Subramani

CHENNAI, AUG. 1. The City Police Commissioner, Mr. K. Muthukaruppan, and the Vepery Police Inspector, Mr. Rajendra Kumar, today tendered an unconditional apology to the Madras High Court in connection with a criminal contempt of court proceedings initiated against them by the former Deputy Assembly Speaker, Mr. Parithi Ilamvazhuthi.

A Division Bench comprising Mr. Justice R. Jayasimha Babu and Mr. Justice C. Nagappan also ordered two advocates - Mr. Raja and Mr. Rathinavel - who were then manning the Public Prosecutor's office, for having made false averments in the High Court, to file their affidavits in three weeks.

Notices were ordered to two other police officials, including the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Triplicane.

Mr. Ilamvazhuthi, arrested on May 17 in connection with a poll- eve violence case, was granted bail by the Sessions Court on May 23. But the prosecution, stating that the MM Court in Egmore had already ordered police custody of Mr. Ilamvazhuthi, obtained an exparte stay upto May 28.

On being informed by the MM Court that no such order had been either sought or granted, Mr. Ilamvazhuthi filed a contempt petition against the two police officials for submitting false representation before the court.

When the matter came up today, the Inspector's counsel submitted that the official never said Mr. Ilamvazhuthi had been granted police custody. But the Bench pointed out that the single judge (Mr. Justice A. Packiaraj) had mentioned in his order that such a point had been brought to his notice. To this, the counsel said the advocates running the PP office might have given such an information orally.

Even in his affidavit, Mr. Rajendra Kumar said, ``I have never stated anywhere in my affidavit nor did I instruct the counsel that the applicant (Mr. Ilamvazhuthi) was in police custody which would expire only on May 28.''

Regarding the use of words ``biased and prejudiced approach'' while referring to the bail order issued by the Principal Sessions Judge, Mr. S. Ashok Kumar, he said it was the counsel who had included those words in the affidavit.

``I categorically pointed out to the advocate that these words were rough and rude, and could create problems. But I was told that these words were legal expressions and would not cast aspersion against any judge,'' he said.

In his affidavit, Mr. Muthukaruppan has said, ``...I most respectfully tender an unconditional apology in the event of this court coming to a conclusion that I had either instructed or had knowledge of the contention of the affidavit filed by the Inspector of Police.''

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Southern States
Previous : Cremation shed cases: CBI awaits prosecution
           sanctions
Next     : BJP blames it on Jayalalithaa