Paramakudi firing: Sampath panel says police acted in self-defence

Updated - November 17, 2021 12:45 am IST

Published - October 30, 2013 02:05 pm IST - CHENNAI

Justice Sampath (second from left), inspecting the spot where the police firing took place in Paramakudi. File photo: L. Balachandar

Justice Sampath (second from left), inspecting the spot where the police firing took place in Paramakudi. File photo: L. Balachandar

The Justice Sampath Commission, which probed the police firing in Paramakudi in which seven people were killed in September 2011, has concluded that police action was in “self-defence” as contemplated under section 96 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Recalling the causes and circumstances that led to police firing, the Commission held that the detention of Adi Dravida leader John Pandian, who was scheduled to visit the memorial of Dalit leader Immanuvel Sekaran, sparked agitations.

The Commission also said that differences between Puthiya Tamizhagam leader K. Krishnasamy and John Pandian led to the events.

The Commission was constituted on September 11, 2011 and it submitted its report to the government on May, 7, 2013. The report was tabled in the Assembly on Wednesday.

It concluded that firing of teargas shells and subsequent lathicharge failed to disperse people; and rioting and arson continued. Petrol bombs were hurled and policemen assaulted.

“Having exhausted every other means to quell the riots, the tahsildar, Paramakudi, the Executive Magistrate, gave orders on the spot for firing after due warning,” said the report.


Prohibition of freebies and creation of more rural jobs to ensure that the rural folks are gainfully employed are some of the recommendations of the Commission.

Though the government accepted many recommendations of the commission, it rejected the two on the ground that they were outside the scope of the inquiry.

Chief Secretary Sheela Balakrishnan in her order also said the government had not accepted what it called as disparaging remarks made by the commission about the police in the aftermath of the riots.

While appreciating the “admirable way” in which the police officers conducted themselves during the hostile atmosphere, the commission described as “disgraceful” the conduct of some of them after the riots.

“Their conduct after the riots was disgraceful and at variance with the prescription of the police standing orders, as can be seen from the fact that several rioters were beaten up,” the Judge had observed.

The government accepted the recommendation of the commission that no action should be taken against a 10th standard boy, who was a bystander, considering his future.

Suggestions recorded

The commission has recorded the suggestions made before it by the respondents. One of them was that no official recognition should be given to the anniversary of any caste leader.

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 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.