IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No. of 2022 S.Muthukumar (M/49 years) S/o. Sankaran, No: 430, LIG, Colony,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
W.P. No. of 2022
S.Muthukumar (M/49 years)
S/o. Sankaran,
No: 430, LIG, Colony,
Anna Nagar,
Madurai- 625020 … Petitioner
-Vs- 1. The Secretary,
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, New Delhi.
2. The Home secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St. George, Chennai- 600009.
3. The Director General of Police, No. 601, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai- 600004.
4. The District Collector, Tuticorin District.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Tuticorin District.
6. Mr. M.S Raj,
Thandavamoorthy Nagar,
Valasarwakam, Chennai – 600087.
7. Mr. V.M.S Mohamed Mubarak,
State President, SDPI
4/7, Ibrahim Sahib Street,
Seethakadi Nagar, Mannadi,
Chennai- 600001. … Respondents AFFIDAVIT OF S.MUTHUKUMAR
I, S. Muthukumar, S/o. Sankaran, Hindu, aged about 49 years, now residing at No: 430, LIG, Colony, Anna Nagar, Madurai- 625020, having temporarily come down to Chennai, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows:-
1. I am the Petitioner herein and as such I am well acquainted with the facts of the case and I am competent to swear this affidavit and I have not filed any other Writ Petition seeking for the same relief on the same cause of action.
2. I state that I am an Advocate by profession practising in the Madurai Bench of this Hon’ble High Court and a social worker who has taken up many causes and has fought for justice. I further state that I am actively involved in unravelling the truth and bringing to book those persons who are responsible for the firing incident that took place in Tuticorin on 22-05-
2018 and I have also filed cases, deposed as a witness regarding the same.
3. I state that originally a protest was conducted by the public and other political parties to close the copper industry run by Sterlite Industries in Tuticorin citing environmental and health hazards caused to the public. I further state that on 22-05-2018, the protest turned violent, and the mob went on a rampage damaging public property and injuring the public and the police in order to control the unruly mob used force and ultimately opened fire causing injuries and 13 persons succumbed to it.
4. I state that on coming to know of the incident and the injuries caused thereon, I had filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench in WP(MD) No.11397/2018, praying to provide quality and hygienic treatment to the injured persons. I further state that this Hon’ble Court by the order dated —– was pleased to direct the state government to provide quality and hygienic treatment to the injured persons.
5. I state the investigation into the firing incident is being conducted the Central Bureau of Investigation, which is still under progress and no final report has been filed. I further state that the state government was please to order a Commission of Enquiry headed by Hon’ble Mrs.Aruna
Jagadeesan, a retired judge of this Hon’ble Court. It is pertinent to mention that I had deposed as a witness in both the investigations and both the investigations are still under way and have not yet been concluded.
6. I further state that while the matter stood thus, the Respondent No.6 herein, has written and directed a short film based on the Tuticorin firing
incident, titled “PEARLCITY ASSASINATION (முத்து நகர் படுககொலை),” produced and released by Naatchiyal Films and
Tharuvai Talkies. I further state that while the CBI and the Commission of Enquiry are still investigating the incident, Respondent No.6 has mischievously termed the firing incident as an assassination, intending to influence the investigation and its progress.
7. I state that I had sent a representation to Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and to various other authorities on 02-04-2022, seeking a ban on the release of the short film directed by Respondent No.6 and since no action was taken, I had again sent a representation on 02-05-2022 reiterating the earlier representation.
8. I state that a number of meetings have been conducted by Respondent
Nos.6 & 7 in various cities to promote that short film. I further state that it
is pertinent to mention here that Respondent No.7 is the State President of a political party named SDPI.
9. I state that it has now come to my knowledge through newspaper reports that Respondent Nos. 6 & 7 had released the trailer of the short film on 0605-2022 at Mark Studio, Sterling Road, Nungambakkam, in the presence of politicians like Mr. Thol Thirumavalavan, Mr.Mutharasan, among others.
10. I state that on watching the trailer, it is seen that the short film is to be released and screened on 20-05-2022 at various places all over the state and that it is also to be uploaded on online streaming websites like Tamilsott and Vimeo. I further state that the trailer projects the incident in a lopsided manner solely with a view to incite that public. I further state that the release of the short film 2 days prior to the 4th anniversary of the firing incident, will cause unnecessary tension and law and order problems in Tuticorin and as well as other places in the state.
11. I further state that while the investigation is not yet concluded, the Respondent No.6 has wantonly titled the short film as an Assassination trying to deceive the viewers, create unrest, law and order issues in the state. I further state that the short film has already been screened at various film festivals and has also recently been screened in USA.
12. I state that Respondent Nos.6 & 7, have made 1,00,000 DVD copies of the short film and intend to circulate it and screen it on 20-05-2022 and 22-052022 all over the state to create unrest and to scuttle the fair ongoing investigation. I further state that it appears from the trailer that the entire short film has been made in a biased manner in order to benefit the members of a few political parties and other organizations, whose involvement in instigating the violent mob on 22-05-2018 will otherwise come to light, if a fair and proper investigation is conducted.
13. I state that besides myself, there are many other social workers and like minded persons who have real apprehensions about the preconceived conclusion arrived at by Respondent No.6 in his short film and the release and screening of the same, may cause great damage to the ongoing fair probe.
14. I further state that the trailer of the short film appears to be one sided and if the short film is allowed to be released or screened, it would cause great prejudice and hamper the ongoing investigations and there is a possibility that the real truth will never see the light of day.
15. I state that left with no other alternative or effective remedy expect to approach this Hon’ble Court invoking its Extraordinary Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, I am constrained to file this Writ Petition seeking the relief of a Writ of Mandamus.
16. I state that despite sending representations, the authorities have not considered the same and if the short film is allowed to be released or screened to the public, it will cause great prejudice and hamper the ongoing investigations. I have made out a prima facie case and the balance of convience is in my favour and if the necessary interim order is not passed, it would cause great prejudice to the ongoing investigations and on the other hand no real prejudice will be caused to the respondents herein.
It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue an Interim Injunction restraining Respondent Nos. 6 & 7 or any other person acting or claiming through them from releasing the short film titled “PEARLCITY ASSASINATION (முத்து நகர் படுககொலை)” on 20-05-2022 or 22-05-
2022 or on any other day at Chennai, Tuticorin or in any other place in Tamil
Nadu pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
Therefore for the reasons stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a WRIT OF MANDMUS, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to forbear Respondent Nos. 6 & 7 or any other person acting or claiming through them from releasing the short film titled “PEARLCITY ASSASINATION (முத்து நகர்
படுககொலை)” on 20-05-2022 or 22-05-2022 or on any other day at
Chennai, Tuticorin or in any other place in Tamil Nadu based on the Petitioner’s representations dated 02-04-2022 and 02-05-2022 and pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

Solemnly affirmed at Chennai on Before Me,
This the 10th day of May, 2022 and
The deponent having having understood
The contents has signed in my presence. Advocate : Chennai

You may also like...

WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Call Now ButtonCALL ME