Police investigations should be conducted in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court and should not result in the harassment of residents.

M.V.MURALIDARAN, J.

That the instant probono public interest litigation writ petition is filed by the petitioner, who is also a practising Advocate at Tirunelveli District Court, seeking direction against the Police officials, especially in Tuticorin and Tirunelveli Districts and Southern part of Tamil Nadu not to harass the residents of Tuticorin and Tirunelveli Districts.

2. Though pursuant to the out break caused in the procession against Sterlite Copper Unit at Tuticorin, the petitioner claims himself as the District Secretary of “Makkalathikaram”, he is lamented that not only himself but his members of the organisation and common public also. He has stated in his affidavit that in Poovanthi Village, Manamadurai Taluk of Sivagangai District and also Usilampatti Taluk in Madurai District, apart from other part of Tirunelveli District, the members of his association are being harassed physically and mentally by the Police under the guise of enquiry. He has specifically made allegations against the Police personnels attached with C-1, Palayamkottai Police Station as his wife was threatened by the aforesaid Police by tresspassed into his residence of the night hours. Further, the act of the Police has created panic upon the minds of the residence of Tuticorin and Tirunelveli Districts and also the rest of the States. So he was constrained to sent a representation on 31.05.2018 and unavoidably and inevitably rushed to this Court immediately. Considering the urgency of the inhuman act of the Police personnels, hence, he sought for a Mandamus from this Court, as against the respondents to direct them to give suitable instructions to all the Police Personnels of Southern Part of the State.

3. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General Mr.Chellapandian, on instructions would submit that none of the residence are harassed by the Police Personnels and also he rebutted the allegations levelled against the Police Personnels of C-1, Palayamkottai Police Station. He also recollected that the respondents have complied with all the directions given by this Court, subsequent to the police firing then and there. Hence, he prays for the dismissal of the writ petition.

4. We heard Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Chellapandian, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.M.Rajarajan, learned Government Advocate for the respondents. We have carefully considered the rival submission on either side.

5. It is the specific case of the Petitioner that neither himself nor his family members or not any of the residents of the Tuticorin and Tirunelveli District are harassed under the guise of either enquiry or investigation. He also brought to the notice of this Hon’ble Court about the death toll out of police firing. This court put its anxious consideration in the guide lines given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in D.K.Basu’s case, wherein it is held that no one shall be harassed under the guise of investigation. The police ought to have conducted enquiry and investigation in the manner known to law especially as contemplated under the Code of Criminal Procedure and as per the Police Standing Orders. Further there cannot be any decision by the police in complying with the mandatory procedures as per Criminal Procedure Code and Police Standing Order. This Court also concerns about the loss of valuable human life in the police firing at Tuticorin. Now, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the Sterlite Copper Unit in Tuticorin is closed by the State Government. So there cannot be any further agitation or procession from any premise. Under the prevailing circumstances the police shall refrain themselves from harassing any family members of the accused in any of the cases registered by the police in connection with sterlite unit, the police must avoid such allegations raised against them in the affidavit.

6. In this regard, it is also brought to the notice of this Court that the enquiry and investiga