Justices M Sathyanarayanan and P Rajamanickam further directed the Sivaganga Superintendent of Police (SP) to conduct periodical review meetings and ensure that such incidents do not recur.
SUBSCRIBE E-PAPER
STOCK MARKET BSE 38697.05 629.12(1.65%) NSE 11416.95 169.40(1.51%)
Home States Tamil Nadu
HC advises Sivaganga police to take swift action on complaints
Published: 02nd October 2020 11:53 AM | Last Updated: 02nd October 2020 11:53 AM | A+A A-
Justice, Judiciary, Supreme Court Representational Image. (File Photo) By Express News Service
MADURAI: Closing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on the inaction of Poolakurichi police of Sivaganga in registering a complaint raised by a villager, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court advised police to take swift action, especially in cases of cognizable offences.
A Bench comprising Justices M Sathyanarayanan and P Rajamanickam further directed the Sivaganga Superintendent of Police (SP) to conduct periodical review meetings and ensure that such incidents do not recur.
According to the litigant, advocate P Rathinam, victim S Senthil was severely beaten up by four persons on August 1, 2020. He suffered a fracture in his left hand. Though he gave a complaint to the police, no case was registered for several days.
The issue received wide media attention after former High Court judge A Selvam, who is a native of the Poolankurichi village, intervened and protested in front of the police station to register a case on the victim’s complaint. Subsequently, the sub-inspector concerned was transferred and the new investigation officer registered a case. He also filed a charge sheet before the Thirupathur Judicial Magistrate, according to a status report by police.
ADVERTISEMENT
Recording the said facts, the judges observed, “Fortunately, the victims got the support of a former High Court judge but not all victims get the same chance. Police personnel are the guardian of law and order. They should register cases and take swift action on complaints, especially in case of serious offences, so that the offenders do not escape the clutches of law.”
However, the judges refused to grant compensation to the victim, saying that the same ought to be decided by the trial court at the end of the trial.
