Latest news with #Madurai-based
The Hindu
10 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Tirunelveli caste killing case probe must be shifted to CBI, demands NGO
As there is a chance of the State police's investigation into the alleged caste killing of Kavin Selvaganesh in Tirunelveli being compromised, the case should be transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation, according to A. Kathir, Executive Director of Evidence, a Madurai-based NGO. Stressing that both the parents of the accused, S. Surjith, 23, were Sub-Inspectors, Mr. Kathir, during a press meet here on Wednesday, said it would end up with investigating officers favouring the accused. He questioned the intention of Chief Minister M.K. Stalin and his Ministers who had not uttered a single word about the tragic death of the youth. 'When Mr. Stalin could call and express his condolence to the family of custodial death victim B. Ajith Kumar and the Ministers could visit his family, why don't they show the same concern in this case too?,' he asked. Commenting that Mr. Stalin was double-faced in his views about a separate Act for caste killing, he said, 'When the DMK was in opposition, it insisted on an Act for caste killing, but now, the same party leader refuses it, saying that the SC/ST Act was enough.' He questioned the SC/ST Commission's role in condemning the heinous act. 'As a Commission, why can they not be swift to condemn such a horrific crime against an SC youth in broad daylight?. Their laidback approach is not going to achieve anything,' he charged. The parents of the accused, who were also added as accused in the First Information Report, were yet to be arrested, he stated. 'The precedent the State is setting in investigating such sensitive cases is baffling. When the SI couple are learned to be supportive of their son's actions, why cannot the police arrest and remand them?,' he questioned.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Vanchinathan case referred to chief justice; judge censures him
Madurai/Chennai: "You are a comedy piece, I don't know who called you a revolutionary." This was the remark made by Justice G R Swaminathan of Madras high court to a Madurai-based advocate S Vanchinathan, who had been summoned to court on Monday. Amidst protest by several Bar associations against the notice or any contempt action against Vanchinathan, a division bench of Justice Swaminathan and Justice K Rajasekar said it was not contempt notice but only a 'pre-cognizance notice'. Noting that the notice was sent for 'a scandalizing campaign' carried out by Vanchinathan in social media, the judges referred the matter to the chief justice of Madras high court for further proceedings. The first bench of Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan, before which the matter was mentioned on Monday, said the issue would be dealt with in the administrative side of the HC. It all began on July 24 when a division bench in Madurai first summoned Vanchinathan after he wrote a letter to the chief justice of India, complaining about Justice Swaminathan's orders and conduct both inside and outside the court. Taking exception to social media posts related to the issue, the judges asked Vanchinathan if he still stood by his allegations. To this, the advocate replied that he would respond only if the query was given in writing. The judges then ordered the court registry to issue a questionnaire to Vanchinathan. However, on July 26 seven former judges of the Madras high court wrote a common representation seeking the withdrawal of the proceedings against Vanchinathan. On their part, several Bar associations had declared that they would hold protests in front of the principal bench as well as the Madurai bench of the high court, besides the district court in Madurai. Several political parties had also issued statements against initiating contempt against Vanchinathan. On Monday, there were protests at several courts. On Monday, the bench expressed its dissatisfaction with the former judges who had signed the representation and said: "We have to record our dismay as to how such interference with the judicial process can be made. Several assumptions which have no factual basis have been made. We characterise their approach as most unfortunate." Vanchinathan has mobilized a group of lawyers and retired Judges to rush to his rescue, they said, adding, "they have also passed reckless comments without waiting for today's outcome. Gratuitous appeals and advice have poured forth. We ignore them with the contempt which they deserve." Cautioning that communal campaigns on social media would eventually weaken the judicial system itself, the bench said: "Time has come to regulate the level of discourse in social media. In the name of freedom of speech and expression, one cannot condone acts of contempt. The channels which rake in money by such slanderous campaigns will have to be taken head on. Lawyers who make such statements are guilty of professional misconduct. There is something called Laxman Rekha which if crossed must invite peril." Lawyers and judges belong to one large family, said the bench, adding: "They are members of the legal community. When a judge sits on the dais, he discharges his judicial duties as per his conscience and by strictly adhering to the judicial oath. He cannot be seen as carrying on his caste or religious labels while on the bench. If someone continues to have such a perception, he obviously has jaundiced eyes."
Time of India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Give up contempt action against lawyer, say rtd judges
Madurai: At least seven retired judges of Madras high court made an appeal to a division bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice K Rajasekar to give up the proposed contempt action against a Madurai-based lawyer, S Vanchinathan, for sending a representation to the Chief Justice of India making certain remarks against Justice Swaminathan. The statement was issued by seven retired judges of Madras high court - Justice K Chandru, Justice D Hariparanthaman, Justice C T Selvam, Justice Akbar Ali, Justice P Kalaiyarasan, Justice S Vimala, and Justice S S Sundar. "We are issuing this appeal only in the interest of the judicial institution and we have no other interest in the matter," said the judges. The judges said the Supreme Court had held that no direct action can be launched by lawyers against the conduct, impropriety or misbehaviour of a judge. You Can Also Check: Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai The apex court has directed that if anyone wants to send a petition against a judge's conduct, it should be sent to the CJI directly. If and when the CJI is of the opinion that it requires an investigation into the truthfulness or otherwise, he can constitute an 'in-house inquiry' into those allegations made against the judge. It is only when the in-house committee is of the opinion that there is a prima facie truth in the allegations made, he can take or order appropriate action in the matter. 'This is the established procedure as of now,'' the judges said. In the absence of any such action taken by the CJI on the petition sent by the advocate, it will be premature for the bench to initiate action against him. Hence, the judges appealed the bench to give up any action at this stage and also to await any decision to be taken by the CJI in the petition sent by advocate Vanchinathan, the judges said..
The Hindu
5 days ago
- Health
- The Hindu
Sankara Nethralaya pays tribute to Dr. Namperumalsamy
At the 31st Annual Meeting of ARVO-INDIA, a forum where eye researchers from across the country gather to present research and share expertise held at Sankara Nethralaya in Chennai, a swatch of time was taken to recall memories of, and honour the legacy of a visionary in the field of ophthalmology, P. Namperumalsamy. 'Dr. Nam', as he was fondly known, was chairman-emeritus of Madurai-based Aravind Eye Hospital. He died on Thursday (July 25, 2025) at the age of 85. Recalling memories, T. Surendran, chairman, Sankara Nethralaya, spoke of his first meetings with Dr. Nam at workshops at Aravind Eye Hospital and of his simple, unassuming personality. 'His association with Sankara Nethralaya dates back to its inception,' he said and added that they hoped to ensure his legacy endured. Gullapalli N. Rao, founder, L.V. Prasad Eye Institute in Hyderabad, said that he had known Dr. Nam for nearly 60 years, and his wife G. Nachiar, for even longer. Recalling him as a simple, humble, and informal person, Dr. Rao said that he had learnt a lot from Dr. Nam's experiences. 'His contribution [to Aravind Eye Hospital] was the creation of strong sub-specialities and training programmes. He also created the research centre,' Dr. Rao said, adding that Dr. Nam had fought with the management to keep research funded and had constantly advocated for research. The two doctors then signed a condolence card, and all delegates at the conference who wished to sign it were asked to do so, with the card to be sent to Aravind Eye Hospital subsequently, organisers of the event said.
Time of India
6 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Madras high court summons advocate over remarks against judge
MADURAI: Taking a serious view of a representation sent by a Madurai-based lawyer to the Chief Justice of India against Justice G R Swaminathan of Madras high court , a division bench called the lawyer and said his conduct prima facie constituted contempt of court. On Thursday, a bench of Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice K Rajasekar while hearing an appeal took note of a case wherein Vanchinathan was counsel and observed that since improper motive was being attributed to one of the judges, it became necessary to summon Vanchinathan to appear in person before the court at 1.15pm. In compliance of the summons issued by the registry, Vanchinathan appeared before the court. You Can Also Check: Chennai AQI | Weather in Chennai | Bank Holidays in Chennai | Public Holidays in Chennai When the judges posed a query to Vanchinathan and asked him whether he still stood by the allegations, he replied that he would answer the question if the query is made in writing. The judges directed the registry to serve the questionnaire to Vanchinathan to enable him to respond to a query as to whether he stands by his imputation against Justice Swaminathan in the discharge of his judicial duties. The bench directed Vanchinathan to appear in person before the court at 1.15pm on Monday. The judges also observed that the conduct of Vanchinathan prima facie constituted criminal contempt of court.
