W.P.No.34845 of 2018 and

Crl.O.P.Nos.23428 of 2018, 21564 and 21565 of 2022

THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE

AND             N.MALA, J.

(Order of the court was made by the Hon’ble Chief Justice)

An objection has been raised by learned Advocate General for the hearing of Crl.O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of 2022 along with W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation) and

Crl.O.P.Nos.23428 of 2018, as a petition under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure to challenge the First Information Report is to be heard by a Single Bench, or, if at all, it is to be heard by a Division Bench having roster to hear criminal cases

involving the sitting or former M.Ps. and M.L.As.

2. The objection has been opposed by Mr.S.V.Raju, learned

Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in Crl.O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of 2022 mainly on the ground that the criminal original petitions have to be heard along with

W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation) and even on the previous occasion when Crl.O.P.No.23428 of 2018 was filed before the Single Bench, it was heard by the Division Bench and disposed of by order dated 8.11.2021.  W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation) and Crl.O.P.Nos.23428 of 2018 have been

ordered to be restored on the file of this court as per the order of the Apex Court dated 20.5.2022 and, accordingly, Crl.O.P.No.23428

of 2018 has been ordered to be listed along with the writ petition.

3. We have heard the parties and find that W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation) was filed by Arappor Iyakkam. Therein a direction was given by this court for enquiry by an independent police officer. A report was filed thereupon.  As the fourth respondent in W.P.No.34845 of 2018 was not furnished with a copy of the enquiry report, he filed Criminal Appeal before the Apex Court.  An order was passed by the Apex Court to restore W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation) and Crl.O.P.No.23428 of 2018 to the file of the High Court with a direction to dispose of the cases on their own merit.  Accordingly, they were listed before this court for hearing and passing order on

merit as per the order of the Apex Court.

4. Since Crl.O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of 2022 filed by S.P.Velumani pertain to the same subject matter, they were listed before the Division Bench. The objection raised by learned Advocate General that those criminal original petitions to challenge the First Information Report should be heard by a Single Bench cannot sustain, as it may result in divergent views while hearing and deciding W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation) and Crl.O.P.No.23428 of 2018.  Thus, Crl.O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of

2022 were ordered to be listed along with  W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation) and Crl.O.P.No.23428 of 2018.

5. The Crl.O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of 2022 can be assigned to a Division Bench hearing criminal cases involving the sitting or former M.Ps. and M.L.As., but it has to be heard along with W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation) and

Crl.O.P.No.23428 of 2018, which can be addressed only by the First Bench having exclusive roster of public interest litigation in view of the judgment of the Apex Court.  Moreover, if  Crl.O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of 2022 are assigned to the Division Bench hearing

criminal cases involving the sitting or former M.Ps. and M.L.As., the said Division Bench cannot hear and decide W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation).

6. Inasmuch as all the cases are related to the petitioner in Crl.O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of 2022, they have to be heard and decided by the same Bench. Accordingly, we do not find any

justification in the objection raised by learned Advocate General in respect of hearing of the cases by the First Bench. It is more so when no such objection was raised on the previous date when at

length argument was made in reference to the present Crl.O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of 2022 (though unnumbered), along with W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation).  Thus, we do not find any substance in the objection of learned Advocate General for assignment of the case to a Bench other than the First Bench, which has to deal with W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation) along with  Crl.O.P.No.23428 of 2018 on merit as per the

direction of the Apex Court.

7. The other objection relates to representation of the petitioner in O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of 2022 [who is the fourth respondent in W.P.No.34845 of 2018 (Public Interest Litigation)] by Mr.S.V.Raju, learned Senior Counsel, who is otherwise an Additional Solicitor General, representing the Government of India in the Supreme Court.
8. S.V.Raju, learned Senior Counsel, is representing the petitioner in Crl.O.P.Nos.21564 and 21565 of 2022 pursuant to the permission expressly granted for it and unless it is withdrawn, the objection regarding representation of the party by the Additional Solicitor General cannot be accepted.  Thus, even the second objection raised by learned Advocate General cannot sustain and is

summarily rejected.

(M.N.B., CJ.)           (N.M., J.)

07.09.2022 sasi

THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

N.MALA,J.

(sasi)

 

W.P.Nos.34845 of 2018 and

Crl.O.P.Nos.23428 of 2018, 21564 and 21565 of 2022

 

07.09.2022