Anbu Jothi ashram case | Madras High Court grants bail to administrator Jubin Baby, wife Maria

Justice A.D. Jagadish Chandira says, police had failed to collect any concrete evidence against the petitioners even after two months of their incarceration and therefore their personal liberty cannot be curtailed merely on the basis of suspicion

April 13, 2023 06:03 pm | Updated 06:03 pm IST - CHENNAI

J. Maria (left) and Jubin Baby (right), the administrators of Anbu Jothi Ashram at Kundalapuliyur near Vikravandi in Villupuram district. File

J. Maria (left) and Jubin Baby (right), the administrators of Anbu Jothi Ashram at Kundalapuliyur near Vikravandi in Villupuram district. File | Photo Credit: Special Arrangement

The Madras High Court on Thursday, April 13, 2023 granted bail to Villupuram Anbu Jothi ashram administrator Jubin Baby, his wife J. Maria and five others facing charges of running an unauthorised home for the mentally challenged and using the inmates for human trafficking, organ trade and so on.

Justice A.D. Jagadish Chandira said, the petitioners “who had been doing service to the society for the past two decades without any blemish were now facing the ordeal of mere suspicion of their involvement in grave charges” but the police were unable to come up with any concrete evidence even after two months.

The judge pointed out that the petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody on February 15 this year and even during their incarceration, neither the Villupuram police nor the Crime Branch-Criminal Investigation Department (CB-CID) had been able to collect any solid material to prove the charges.

He observed that the personal liberty guaranteed under the Constitution and reiterated by the Supreme Court on multiple occasions could not be denied to the petitioners on the basis of mere suspicion and surmises.

The judge directed the petitioners to stay in Chennai and appear before the CB-CID (Metro Wing) daily until further orders.

Earlier, the petitioners’ counsel R. Prabhakaran had contended his “clients had fallen victim to a false campaign of illegalities” and that the charges levelled against them were baseless.

According to him, the petitioners were being punished for doing social service which a very few people come forward to perform.

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.