The court directed the Thoothukudi Judicial Magistrate No. I to issue summons to Minister For Fisheries Anitha R. Radhakrishnan, frame charges against him after his appearance, and then proceed with the trial.
| Photo Credit: N. RAJESH
The Madras High Court on Friday refused to interfere with the inclusion of Fisheries Minister Anitha R. Radhakrishnan as an accused in a case booked for the assault of AIADMK workers at Peyanvilai village during the campaign for the 2009 Tiruchendur byelection necessitated by his defection from the AIADMK to the DMK.
Justice P. Velmurugan dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by the Minister in 2023 against the Tiruchendur Judicial Magistrate’s September 9, 2022 order through which he was added as an accused in the case. The judge took note that the case had been transferred from Tiruchendur to Thoothukudi. Therefore, he directed the Thoothukudi Judicial Magistrate No. I to issue summons to the Minister, frame charges against him after his appearance, and then proceed with the trial. It was made clear that the petitioner would be at liberty to present all materials in his defence during the trial.
According to the victims of the assault, they were sitting in a temporary election office set up by their party at Peyanvilai on December 6, 2009, when Mr. Radhakrishnan too was campaigning in the same village seeking votes for the DMK’s ‘rising sun’ symbol.
The victims said the Minister intentionally stopped by the AIADMK’s election office and sought votes for the DMK. When one of the AIADMK workers asked Mr. Radhakrishnan to vote for the ‘two leaves’ symbol instead, he got irritated and instigated his men to attack, they said.
One of the victims said he was attacked on the forehead with a cricket stump. The others, too, suffered bleeding injuries leading to their hospitalisation. Therefore, the Arumuganeri police in Thoothukudi district registered a First Information Report against Mr. Radhakrishnan and 15 others.
However, while filing the charge sheet, the police dropped the name of the Minister. Hence, the magistrate included him as an accused by invoking Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which empowers courts to proceed against individuals if there is credible evidence to suspect their involvement in a crime.
Though Mr. Radhakrishnan contended before the High Court that the magistrate had failed to put him on notice and afford him an opportunity of hearing before passing the orders under Section 319, Justice Velmurugan rejected the contention and held that there was no necessity to issue any such notice. “The power to proceed against persons appearing to be guilty of an offence is derived from the evidence and the proceedings during the trial or inquiry. Therefore, there is no procedural requirement for the court to issue a notice or summon the individual before making a decision under this Section,” the judge wrote.
Published – November 29, 2024 06:36 pm IST