Madras High Court Orders Arrest Of ADGP To Investigate His Alleged Involvement In Abduction Case

The Madras High Court has ordered the Tamil Nadu police to arrest Additional Director General of Police HM Jayaram to investigate his alleged involvement in an abduction case. The judge has also asked KV Kuppam MLA “Poovai” Jagan Moorthy to cooperate with the investigating authorities.

Justice P Velmurugan directed the police to take action against the ADGP as per law. The court added that being a public servant, Jayaram was answerable to the public. The judge added that a strong message should go out to the public that no one was above law.

“We’re not concerned with any political party. The world knows about the politics going on in India. A message should go out that no one is above law,” the judge orally remarked.

The court was hearing an anticipatory bail petition filed by the MLA. The MLA had approached the court apprehending arrest in connection with an abduction case registered by the Thiruvallur Police Station based on a complaint by one Lakshmi.

Lakshmi had alleged that her elder son had married a girl without the consent of the girl’s family. Thereafter, the girl’s family, with some miscreants, entered their house in search of her elder son. Since the elder son and his wife went into hiding, the miscreants abducted her younger son, aged 18.

Laksmi also alleged that her son was later dropped near a hotel, with injuries. It has been alleged that the young boy was dropped off in the official vehicle of the ADGP. It has also been alleged that the MLA had also conspired in the entire events.

When the anticipatory bail petition came up for hearing on Monday, the Additional Public Prosecutor Damodaran informed the court about the alleged involvement of the ADGP. He informed the court that a case hadn’t been registered against the ADGP yet since the police first wanted to interrogate the MLA. Following this, the court had ordered both the MLA and the ADGP to appear before it in the afternoon.

In the post-lunch session, the court criticised the MLA for being involved in a “Kangaroo court” without actually working for the people of his constituency. The judge said that as an MLA, he should have been a role model for the people instead of acting like a “Third-class” citizen and preventing the investigation.

“You’re not an ordinary person. You have to face things against you. You’re behaving like a third-class person. Already, police and ministers have a tie-up. When will you work for the people?.…You should be a role model for the citizens. The court cannot be a silent spectator when you’re misusing your power and support. People come to support you, believing you’ll help them in their grievance. Without taking up the issue, you’re doing Kangaroo courts. If two people are getting married, let them get married. If there’s any case, let it go to the police and the courts. You’re misdirecting the people,” the judge said.

The court also remarked that this case was an instance for the people of the country to know what their votes were doing. The court told the MLA that when people came to vote for him, bearing the scorching heat and even without having food at times, they expected him to work for them whenever they had grievance and not hold kangaroo courts.

“Let the people know what their votes are doing? This is the right time to know that the democratic country is in a very bad situation. 70,000 people have voted for you, trusted you. Have they voted you to power for holding Kangaroo courts. It’s for working of the people. You should respond to their complaints, guide them. They’ve come to vote for you in scorching heat, sometimes even without eating. Is this how you’re working for them?” the judge asked.

The court also criticised the MLA for showing his might through supporters and obstructing the investigating officers who had approached him in connection with the case. The judge said that if these instances continued, cases should be registered against every supporter who were obstructing the enquiry.

“In the 47 years that you’ve been in politics, how many times have police come for you? You should’ve sat with the police, enquired about the case. You should’ve appeared and cleared your stand. Why are your supporters coming in this? Is this politics? If this happens in future, action should be taken against the supporters also,” the judge said.

The judge thus refrained from passing any orders in the anticipatory bail petition and instead asked the MLA to cooperate with the investigating agency. He added that if the MLA was not cooperating, strict action could be taken against him as per law.

Meanwhile, the judge also asked the police to arrest the ADGP and secure him in a manner known to the law. The court said that the ADGP was free to approach the court to secure bail, and the same could be dealt with as per law.

Case Title: Jaganmoorthy v Inspector of Police