High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
The Chief Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu & Others
Versus
Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. By Secretary, Home Dept. Secretariat & Others
W.P.Nos.3335, 3703, 3704, 3705 and 3910/2009 and Connected M.Ps. and M.P.S.Rs. & Crl.O.P.Nos.4085, 4287 and 4434/2009 W.P.No.3335 of 2009 (Suo Motu Taken up (PIL) WP)
Decided on: 29-10-2009
F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J.
1. I have had the advantage of perusing the order of Mrs.Justice R.Banumathi, who has dealt with the issue involved in these writ petitions in depth, covering every one of the issues raised, contentions made and authorities cited in support of such contentions. I fully concur with every one of the reasoning and conclusions of the illuminating order of the learned Judge. However, I on my part, wish to add my own reasoning and conclusions for our ultimate directions contained in paragraph Nos.602 to 607 of this order.
2. Broad spectrum of this public interest litigation and the connected writ petitions as well as other criminal original petitions concerns the State police, lawyers and the Court.
3. The facts which led to the initiation of the suo motu public interest litigation by this Court are that the members of the Bar went on an indefinite boycott of Courts on and from 29.01.2009, alleging that the Government was not taking any action to stop the genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka. As part of their agitation, some lawyers entered the First Court presided over by the Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice where some of the lawyers who were attending to their cases were asked to join the boycott. One learned senior counsel by name Mr.A.E.Chellaiah and his wife advocate Mrs.Vasanthi, were stated to have been abused by the agitating lawyers. The boycott, which commenced on 29.01.2009, continued and was gaining momentum. Several other incidents as part of agitation of the lawyers was also reported on various dates.
4. On 17.02.2009, Dr.Subramaniam Swamy as party-in-person stated to have appeared before the Bench presided over by Hon’ble Mr.Justice P.K.Misra and Hon’ble Mr.Justice K.Chandru, for getting himself impleaded in a case related to a temple situated at Chidambaram. Around 11.45 a.m. some of the agitating lawyers stated to have entered the Court Hall of Hon’ble Mr.Justice P.K.Misra Bench and apart from abusing and assaulting Dr.Subramaniam Swamy, stated to have thrown eggs at him, under the direct gaze of the Hon’ble Judges. In fact the Judges frowned upon the misbehaviour of all those lawyers and recorded the same in their order dated 17.02.2009. A copy of which was forwarded to the Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice for appropriate action and the Registry was also directed to send a copy of the said order to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India.
5. The then Commissioner of Police addressed a communication dated 17.02.2009, to the Registrar General pointing out the unsavory incident that took place in Court Hall No.3 and sought for the concurrence to register a criminal case and set the criminal law in motion against those advocates. The Registrar General by a communication dated 18.02.2009, informed the Commissioner of Police that it is for the police to register any criminal case on its own and the concurrence of the Registry is not required in law.
6. The case which was posted on 17.02.2009, before the 3rd Court was adjourned to 19.02.2009. On 18.02.2009, according to the Commissioner of Police, there was a meeting convened by the Honble Acting Chief Justice in his Chamber, that the Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice while deploring the incident of 17.02.2009, told the police to be firm in taking action against the erring advocates.
7. On 19.02.2009, according to the Commissioner of Police, there was a specific intelligence input from the Intelligence Section of the City Police and the State Special Branch CID that the advocates who were involved in the incident on 17.02.2009, in the 3rd Court Hall would create serious problems when Dr.Subramaniam Swamy was scheduled to visit the High Court in connection with a matter before the Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice and in the 21st Court.
8. On 19.02.2009, the Commissioner of Police arranged for a heavy police guard in the High Court campus in order to ensure that no untoward incident takes place at the time of the visit of Dr.Subramaniam Swamy. Dr.Subramaniam Sw
Rohtas Industries Ltd. v. Staff Union, (AIR 1976 SC 425 : (1976) 2 SCC 82 : 1976-I-LLJ-274)
Swatontapeth, Vasco-De-Gama, Gao
Dr. D.C. Saxena V. Honble the Chief Justice of India
Delhi Judicial Service Association Tis Hazari Court v. State of Gujarat
Delhi Judicial Service Assn. Vs. State of Gujarat
Association for Protection of Democratic Rights Vs. State of West Bengal and Ors
Ramon Services (P) Ltd. Vs. Subhash Kapoor
Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. v. G.S.T.Mazdoor Sabha
T.K.Rangarajan v. Govt. of T.N.
Ramon Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Subhash Kapoor, (2001) 1 SCC 118 = 2001 -1 -L.W. 61
Daroga singh and others v. B.K.Pandey
Delhi Judicial Service Association Vs. State of Gujarat
Harish Uppal (Ex-Capt.) Vs. Union of India
A.P. SRTC v G. Srinivas Reddy (2006) 3 SCC 674.
All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, Chennai v. State Election Commissioner and others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.