Tvk sc case arguments started. Sr. Adv. Gopal Subramanium (for TVK): the petition filed before the HC was for a very limited purpose. That the govt should be directed to frame a protocol for road shows. The AAG appears on behalf of the state. In the order various

[10/10, 12:21] Sekarreporter: The plea seeks stay on the Madras High Court order, appointment of a former Supreme Court judge to oversee the probe, and expunging of adverse remarks against the party and its leaders.

#KarurStampede
[10/10, 12:21] Sekarreporter: Sr. Adv. Gopal Subramanium (for TVK): the petition filed before the HC was for a very limited purpose. That the govt should be directed to frame a protocol for road shows. The AAG appears on behalf of the state. In the order various allegations have been made. Adverse inferences are drawn against a person without being a party…. Please see the various averments…
[10/10, 12:22] Sekarreporter: Justice Maheshwari: in para 3 of the order it is mentioned mr. So and so govt advocate that WP filed before Madurai bench was declined. So this a petition filed in Chennai. The relief was to formulate a SOP. So whether this relief would fall under a criminal WP? It is not about quashing. This is an incident with respect to Karur. Once it is a petition to karur and Madurai bench was taking cognisance so why this was entertained? That too for SOP? Principal bench can take cognisance we are not denying. But we want to understand from you.

Sr. Adv. Aryama Sundaram: in madras Madurai jurisdiction is only Madurai unless the CJ constitutes a special bench.