Supreme Court sets aside Madras HC order directing arrest of TN police officer in abduction case
The top court also transferred the investigation in the case to the state's Crime Branch-Criminal Investigation Department. The Tamil Nadu government agreed to it.
Further, the Supreme Court urged the chief justice of the Madras High Court to transfer matters related to the abduction to a bench different from the one hearing Jayaram's case, The Indian Express reported.
The Madras High Court had on June 16 ordered Jayaram's arrest in a kidnapping case that also named Kilvaithinakuppam MLA Poovai M Jagan Moorthy as a suspect. The police officer claimed that he was subsequently taken into custody for about 24 hours, while the state government maintained that he had merely joined the investigation.
The case stems from a police complaint filed by one Lakshmi, whose elder son married a woman from Theni district against the wishes of her family. Fearing retaliation, the couple went into hiding. In a bid to trace them, members of the woman's family, with the help of hired men, allegedly abducted Lakshmi's younger son from their home.
The 17-year-old boy was later found abandoned near a hotel with visible injuries. During the investigation, the police discovered that an official vehicle linked to Jayaram was allegedly used in the abduction.
The woman's family had reportedly also sought help from Moorthy. The MLA is accused of being involved in the abduction and is also alleged to have later prevented the police from questioning him by having party supporters gather around his residence.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court had described the High Court order directing Jayaram's arrest as shocking. 'I have been a judge for 18 years,' Bhuyan had said. 'I never knew I had this power [to direct arrest].'
The Supreme Court then asked the Tamil Nadu government why the officer was suspended if he was not arrested.
On Thursday, lawyer Siddharth Dave, representing the Tamil Nadu government, said that Jayaram was not suspended because of the High Court order, The Indian Express reported. He said that the official was suspended as per the provisions of the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969, under which a civil servant against whom a criminal inquiry is pending can be suspended.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
41 minutes ago
- First Post
History Today: When London was rocked by its worst terror attack since World War II
On the morning of July 7, 2005, a series of explosions struck London during rush hour. Bombs detonated in three crowded London Underground trains and on a city bus. The suicide attacks killed 56 people, including the bombers, and injured around 700 others. It was the deadliest terror attack in Britain since World War II. The bombings happened while world leaders, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, were attending the G8 summit in Scotland read more On July 7, 2005, London faced its worst attack since World War II when bombs went off at three Underground stations and on a double-decker bus. The suicide bombings killed 56 people, including the bombers, and around 700 others were injured. Also on this day in 1981, US President Ronald Reagan announced he was putting forward Arizona Judge Sandra Day O'Connor's name to become the first female justice to serve on the US Supreme Court. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD As part of Firstpost Explainers' History Today series, here's a look at what happened on July 7: 2005 London bombings On the morning of July 7, 2005, London was hit by a series of explosions during rush hour. Bombs went off in three busy Underground trains and on a city bus. The suicide attacks, believed at the time to be linked to al-Qaeda, killed 56 people, including the bombers, and left about 700 injured. This was the deadliest attack on Britain since World War II. No alert was issued before the blasts. The train bombs went off on the London Underground around 8:50 am, in three different locations. The London Underground train which was involved in an explosion at Aldgate Underground station. Reuters/File Photo About an hour later, a double-decker bus near Tavistock Square on Upper Woburn Place was also targeted. The blast tore the roof off the bus. The bombings took place while world leaders, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, were gathered at the G8 summit in Scotland. Speaking shortly after the news broke, Blair described the attacks as barbaric and said the timing, during the summit, was likely deliberate. Of the four bombers, three were born in Britain and one in Jamaica. On September 1, 2005, al-Qaeda officially claimed responsibility in a video aired on the Al-Jazeera network. Just two weeks later, on July 21, another four men tried to carry out a second set of attacks on the city's transport system. But these bombs did not go off as planned. The suspects were arrested by the end of the month. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Sandra Day nominated to US Supreme Court On this day in 1981, US President Ronald Reagan declared that he would nominate Arizona Judge Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme Court, making her the first woman ever to be chosen for the role. During his 1980 campaign, Reagan had vowed to nominate a woman to the top court as soon as the chance arose. He picked O'Connor from a list of around two dozen male and female candidates as his first Supreme Court nominee. The US Senate later unanimously approved her appointment on September 21. She was sworn in by Chief Justice Warren Burger on September 25. US President Reagan presents his Supreme Court nominee Sandra Day O'Connor in the Rose Garden of the White House. AP/File Photo Sandra Day earned her law degree in just two years and graduated near the top of her class. She went on to marry John Jay O'Connor III, a fellow student. Despite her academic success, she faced rejection from law firms because she was a woman. She then entered public service and got a job as deputy county attorney in San Mateo, California. In 1953, her husband was drafted into the US Army and posted to West Germany as a military judge. Sandra worked there as a civilian lawyer for the army. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD She became Arizona's assistant attorney general in 1965 and was appointed to a vacant seat in the state senate in 1969. After winning elections, she became the first woman in the country to serve as majority leader of a state senate. This Day, That Year 1797: For the first time in US history, the House of Representatives used its power to impeach and voted to charge Senator William Blount of Tennessee. 1898: The United States annexed Hawaii, which later became a territory in 1900 and a state in 1959. 1981: Former India captain and legendary wicketkeeper-batter Mahendra Singh Dhoni was born. 2013: Andy Murray ended a 77-year wait for a British men's singles champion at Wimbledon by beating Novak Djokovic in the final. 2021: Haitian President Jovenel Moise was assassinated, and his wife was injured in a late-night attack at their home.
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
Delhi Fuel Ban: Govt would urge SC to allow uniform rules on overage vehicles, says CM Rekha Gupta
Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta has said that her government will urge the Supreme Court to allow uniform rules on overage vehicles in the national capital in line with those followed across the country. Gupta's remarks came after Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena wrote to her saying it is 'irrational' to imagine that a 10-year-old diesel vehicle has reached its end of life in Delhi while remaining roadworthy and lawful in any other city under the same law. The L-G said in the letter sent to CM on Saturday that "this appears incongruent with the principle of legal certainty and equal treatment. " The LG also said the government should file a review petition before the Supreme Court apprising it of the range of initiatives taken by the government in the recent past and the changed circumstances for reconsideration of its order relating to end-of-life vehicles in relation to Delhi-NCR. Last week, the Delhi government urged the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to immediately put on hold the ban on refuelling petrol cars older than 15 years and diesel vehicles older than 10 years. Delhi Environment Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa, in a letter to CAQM chairman Rajesh Verma, said the fuel ban is not feasible and cannot be implemented due to technological challenges. Starting July 1, all end-of-life (EOL) vehicles— diesel vehicles older than 10 years and petrol vehicles older than 15 years — irrespective of the state in which they are registered, were barred from fuelling in Delhi, according to a directive by the CAQM. Talking to reporters on the sidelines of an event on Sunday, Chief Minister Gupta said the government will heed the people's sentiments before the Supreme Court. "We will tell the Supreme Court about the pollution control measures taken by the government. The parameters that are applicable in the entire country should also apply to Delhi. We want Delhiites not to face any inconvenience," she said. When the order to ban fuel to overage vehicles was issued by CAQM, the government was worried since then, she said. "The previous governments never did anything to control pollution in Delhi. Hence, NGT had to intervene and take such steps. However, now the situation has changed. Our environment minister wrote a letter to CAQM and told them such a provision cannot be implemented in Delhi," she said. The chief minister said they are committed to providing relief to people. Gupta also pointed out that if an overage vehicle is denied fuel in Delhi, it can still be filled from neighbouring areas. The decision to ban end-of-life vehicles from the roads of Delhi as well as NCR (National Capital Region) is not new. A 2018 Supreme Court ruling banned diesel vehicles older than 10 years and petrol vehicles older than 15 years in Delhi. A 2014 National Green Tribunal order also prohibits the parking of vehicles aged over 15 years in public areas. This time, however, the denial to refuel these vehicles at petrol pumps was introduced as a measure to enforce the ban In the communication to Gupta, Saxena also suggested that the government take up the matter with the CAQM chairman, presenting the entire gamut of facts for reconsidering the directions relating to overage vehicles and keeping them in abeyance at least until the entire NCR region is in a state of preparedness. Minister Sirsa said the government has accepted the suggestions made by the LG and is moving forward accordingly. "The chief minister will instruct the chief secretary to act on the LG's recommendations, including reaching out to the Supreme Court and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH). Our stand is clear — vehicles should be evaluated based on actual emissions, not just their age,' Sirsa told PTI. Sirsa said that one of the five recommendations, which involved communicating with the CAQM, has already been acted upon. "We have already written to CAQM. The rest of the suggestions will also be taken up in due course," he said. Social media has been abuzz with public anger over the ban ever since it was implemented on July 1. A majority of Delhi vehicle owners (79 per cent) are against the 'fuel ban for old vehicles' rule, according to a new survey released on July 3. In the survey by LocalCircles, people were asked whether they supported the Delhi government's new rule that petrol pumps cannot sell fuel to 10-year-old diesel and 15-year-old petrol vehicles (including two-wheelers). Our stand is clear — vehicles should be evaluated based on actual emissions, not just their age.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
CJI Gavai flags drift from ‘bail is rule & jail the exception'
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai on Sunday lamented that the Indian judiciary had somewhat lost sight of the cardinal legal principle that 'bail is the rule and jail the exception,' while underlining the pressing need to reinforce the constitutional value of personal liberty. Justice Gavai's remarks come amid increasing judicial and public scrutiny over delayed bail hearings (PTI) Delivering the 11th Justice VR Krishna Iyer Memorial Law Lecture in Kochi, Justice Gavai expressed concern over the growing culture of prolonged incarceration of undertrials and the tendency of courts to prioritise custodial detention over bail. 'In the recent past, this principle (bail is the rule) was somewhat forgotten,' he said, referring to Justice Krishna Iyer's pioneering contributions to bail jurisprudence and humane criminal procedure. It was Justice Iyer who laid down this principle through his judgments and fiercely championed it. 'I am happy to state that I had the opportunity in the last year, 2024, to reiterate this legal principle in the cases of Prabir Purkayastha, Manish Sisodia, and Kavita Vs ED,' said the CJI, making a strong case for reviving the pro-liberty judicial stance that was once the hallmark of Indian courts. Also Read | Supreme Court admin seeks removal of ex-CJI Chandrachud from official residence In the cases of Prabir Purkayastha, Manish Sisodia, and Kavita, the Supreme Court, with Justice Gavai on the bench, underscored the centrality of personal liberty in the criminal justice system while ruling that the deprivation of liberty cannot be justified without strict adherence to legal safeguards. These rulings reflected a conscious effort by the apex court to breathe life into Justice Iyer's principle that bail should be the norm, not the exception, and that liberty cannot be held hostage to procedural expediency. Quoting Justice Iyer's landmark ruling in Gudikanti Narasimhulu Vs State of Andhra Pradesh (1978), the CJI said: 'Heavy bail from poor man is obviously wrong. Poverty is society's malady and sympathy, not sternness, is the judicial response.' He added that Justice Iyer's jurisprudence reminded judges to consider factors such as the period spent in jail and the likelihood of delay in appeals while deciding bail pleas, instead of imposing onerous and exclusionary conditions. Justice Gavai's remarks come amid increasing judicial and public scrutiny over delayed bail hearings, procedural rigidity, and the lack of a uniform, compassionate approach to undertrial detention -- issues that have seen the Supreme Court question both high courts and district judiciary in recent months. The CJI, who will demit office in November, recalled that Justice Iyer's ideas continue to guide his own judicial reasoning, including in major decisions delivered last year. 'I relied on Justice Krishna Iyer's judicial philosophy in many cases, and I am still doing that,' he said. Also Read | Why Chief Justice BR Gavai got emotional: 'His dream has come true' In his speech, themed 'Role of Justice VR Krishna Iyer in Balancing the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy', Justice Gavai paid rich tribute to Justice Iyer's progressive blend of legal reasoning and social empathy. 'Justice Krishna Iyer stood up for the poor and the underprivileged, and remained a human rights champion, a crusader for social justice and the environment, and a doyen of civil liberties throughout his life,' he said. Justice Gavai highlighted how Justice Iyer's judicial philosophy reshaped several areas of constitutional law, from prison reform to affirmative action, from the right to life under Article 21 to the abolition of the death penalty. Justice Gavai also acknowedged Justice Iyer's seminal role in expanding the scope of Article 21 in Maneka Gandhi Vs Union of India (1978), where the latter observed: 'Personal liberty makes for the worth of the human person.' These words, he said, formed the bedrock for future judicial pronouncements that recognised rights such as access to clean water, food, shelter and healthcare as integral to the right to life. Also Read | Interpretation of Constitution has to be pragmatic: CJI B R Gavai The CJI concluded. 'Every time a bench prioritizes substantive justice over technicalities... every time the court upholds human dignity and social equity, Justice Krishna Iyer's legacy is not just honoured, but actively lived.' Justice Iyer served as a Supreme Court judge from 1973 to 1980, leaving an indelible mark through his activist jurisprudence and deep empathy for the marginalised. He passed away on December 4, 2014, at the age of 100.
