Back
2019 Supreme(Mad) 2194
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.VAIDYANATHAN, N. ANAND VENKATESH, JJ.
P. Rathinam - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Tamilnadu Rep. By Secretary to Government Home Dept., Chennai & Others – Respondents
WP(MD) No. 24324 of 2019
Decided On : 20-11-2019
The central legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of specific findings related to the conviction of the accused persons under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the impact of the Government Orders on the community subjected to attack.
Headnote:
Life Convicts - Release of 13 life convicts - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 r/w Section 34 of IPC - [Section 3(2)(V) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Section 34 of IPC, (2010) 12 SCC 427] - The court discussed the specific findings related to the conviction of the accused persons under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the impact of the Government Orders on the community subjected to attack, highlighting the seriousness and sensitivity of the issue.
Fact of the Case:
The court directed the respondents to furnish copies of the Government Orders releasing 13 life convicts, and added the convicts as respondents in the Writ Petition. The court also permitted the petitioner to amend the prayer in the Writ Petition and challenged the Government Orders.
Finding of the Court:
The court emphasized the seriousness and sensitivity of the issue and decided to test the basis on which the Government Orders were passed. It also directed the first respondent to file a status report addressing specific issues related to the release of the life convicts.
Issues: The court raised issues regarding the consideration of specific findings related to the conviction of the accused persons under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the opportunity given to the petitioner before the Government Orders were passed, the seniority of consideration for premature release, and the impact on the community subjected to attack.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the seriousness and sensitivity of the issue, the specific findings related to the conviction of the accused persons, and the impact of the Government Orders on the community subjected to attack.
Final Decision: The court directed the first respondent to file a status report addressing specific issues and scheduled the next date of hearing for further proceedings.
JUDGMENT :
S. Vaidyanathan, N. Anand Venkatesh, JJ.
(Prayer: Directing the respondents to furnish the copies of the G.O.MS.No. 603 to 615 home (PRI-IV) department dated 08.11.2019 on payment of charges if any at the earliest as the government of Tamil Nadu has ordered and released 13 life convicts whose conviction and Sentence of life had been confirmed by the Honourable supreme Court of India on 22.10.2009.)
Pursuant to the orders passed by this Court on 18.11.2019, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor who took notice, had produced G.O.Ms.Nos.603 to 615, Home (Pri.IV) Department, dated 08.11.2019, pursuant to which, 13 life convicts were released in this case. A copy of the Government Orders was also furnished to Mr.P.Rathinam, who is appearing as a party-in-person. We had called for the entire files and the files were also furnished before this Court. We are taking cognizance of the Government Orders that have been referred supra and also the files that have been placed before us. Taking into consideration the seriousness and sensitivity involved in the issue, this Court wants to test the basis on which the Government Orders were passed. In the meantime, Mr.P.Rathinam, Petitioner-in-person, requested this Court to permit him to amend the prayer in the Writ Petition and permit him to challenge the Government Orders that have been referred supra. The Petitioner also requested permission to add additional grounds in the Writ Petition, since he is going to challenge the Government Orders. Permission is granted and the Petitioner is permitted to file necessary petitions for amending the relief in the Writ Petition and for adding the additional grounds in the Writ Petition.
2. Before taking any decision in this Writ Petition or passing any further orders in this Writ Petition, we thought it appropriate to implead the 13 life convicts, who have been released by the Government. We cannot pass any final orders without hearing these 13 life convicts. The following 13 life convicts are suo-motu added as respondents 4 to 16 in this Writ Petition.
1. Chinna Odunkan (LCT No.3809),
Son of Periyapanayan,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
2. Selvam (LCT No.3812),
Son of Pitchai,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
3. Manokaran (LCT No.3803),
Son of Velliyankiri,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
4. Manikandan (LCT No.3801),
Son of Kanchivanam,
Nagappanpatti Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
5. Azhagu (LCT No.3808),
Son ofMookan @ Nalliappan,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
6. Chokkanathan (LCT No.3811),
Son of Ambalam,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
7. Sekar (LCT No.3813),
Son of Pandi,
Kavattaiyanpatti,
Ettimangalam Post,
Melur Taluka,
Madurai District.
8. Ponnaiah (LCT No.3799),
Son of Uzhaganathan,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
9. Rajendran (LCT No.3810),
Son of Karuthappanayan,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
10. Ranganathan (LCT No.3804),
Son of Nallusamy,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
11.Ramar (LCT No.5222),
Son of Subbaiah Ambalam,
S. Othapatti,
Puthusukkanpatti Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
12. Sakkarai Murthy (LCT No.3807),
Son of Nallusamy,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
13. Andichamy (LCT No.3802),
Son of Andikkalai,
Melavalavu Post,
Melur Taluk,
Madurai District.
3. The first respondent shall file a status report before this Court providing details with regard to the materials that were considered before coming to the conclusion to release the 13 life convicts. The status report shall specifically address the following issues:
(a) Admittedly, in this case, the life convicts apart from being convicted for various offences under the Indian Penal Code, were also charged for the offence under Section 3(2)(V) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 r/w Section 34 of IPC. The Division Bench of this Court while considering the appeals filed by the accused persons and the Criminal Revision filed by the Petitioner herei
