Madras HC | ‘No hue & cry on murder of a police officer by rowdy elements?’: Court questions “cautious silence” of human rights activists, political leaders

Madras High Court: A Division Bench of N. Kirubakaran and V.M. Velumani, JJ., while addressing an issue with regard to murder of police officials by rowdy gangs observed that,

If a policeman is attacked, the Society is not safe. The Police has got powers to use mild force for the maintenance of law and order.

Bench stated that what is happening in society is that people gather in a group to overpower the police, abuse and attack him while doing his statutory duty.

Media has reported many cases of attacks of police, recently a young policeman was murdered in a bomb attack made by a rowdy while he was sought to be apprehended by a Special Police Team.

It was noted that while doing his duty, he laid down his precious life for the sake of the society leaving behind his young wife who is 2 months pregnant.

In view of the above incident, the Chief Minister ordered compensation of Rs 50 lakhs as well as Government Job to a person in the family, no other political party including the ruling party, except DMDK party condoled the death of the young policeman at the hands of the rowdy element.

Human rights activists and organizations who used to make hue and cry and condemn police action against criminals as violation of human rights, are keeping quiet.

Further, the Court noted that it is very disheartening to note that the representatives of people, ie., persons who claim to be political leaders, have neither condemned the said incident nor offered condolence for the death of the young policeman to the bereaved family.

Bench added that the cautious silence tactically approves the death of the Police Officer in the hands of the rowdy element.

Brutal murder of policemen due to a bomb thrown by a rowdy who was involved in a double murder case proves that the apprehension expressed by this Court that rowdy gangs are active in Tamil Nadu for more than 25 years while dealing with this HCP with regard to the detention of a goonda, this Court raised about 25 queries about rowdy gangs and history sheeters.

State responded stating that there is no necessity for an enactment like Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act, 1999 and The Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act, 2000 in Tamil Nadu as there are no rowdy gangs and anti-social elements, terrorists, etc, as that of Karnataka and Maharashtra.

Court added that since it is the submission of Assistant Solicitor General that the enactment similar to Maharashtra Control of Organised Crimes Act, 1999 and The Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act, 2000 is a State subject, the State Government has to come out with a proper reply with regard to the queries raised by this Court.

Matter to be posted in 2 weeks.[Velu v. State of T.N., HCP No. 2516 of 2018, decided on 24-08-2020]

Join the discussion

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.