SUPREME COURT QUASHES MADRAS HC ORDER FOR TN ADGP’S ARREST IN ABDUCTION CASE; HANDS OVER PROBE TO CB-CID:

The Supreme Court, on June 19, set aside the Madras High Court’s order that had directed the arrest of Tamil Nadu Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) H.M. Jayaram in connection with an abduction case. The apex court also transferred the investigation of the matter to the Crime Branch-Criminal Investigation Department (CB-CID) of the Tamil Nadu Police. Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu, stated that the State had no objection to the transfer of the investigation to CB-CID. He further clarified before the Court that the suspension of the ADGP was not a consequence of the Madras High Court’s directive.

In addition to these directions, the Supreme Court also requested the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to assign the abduction case and all related matters to a different bench, away from the one currently hearing the matter. The decision was rendered by a bench comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Manmohan in a petition filed by ADGP Jayaram, who had challenged the High Court’s order directing his arrest to facilitate an investigation into his alleged involvement in the abduction.

The Supreme Court bench observed that the petitioner has the right to challenge his suspension through appropriate legal channels. The Court acknowledged that the order passed by the High Court had arisen from a controversial context. Consequently, the bench opined that the interests of justice would be served by handing over the investigation to the CB-CID. The Court also acknowledged the submission made by Mr. Dave on behalf of the State, reiterating that the State had no objection to the transfer of the investigation. The Court further emphasized the need for impartiality in the judicial process by requesting the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to assign the current matter and related proceedings to another bench. Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s direction to arrest and take action against the petitioner, and disposed of the case.

During the proceedings held a day earlier, the Supreme Court had expressed concern over the suspension of the senior police officer and had taken note of the Madras High Court’s decision to direct his arrest. The Court found it shocking that such a direction had been issued in the course of hearing an anticipatory bail plea filed by another accused person. After examining the suspension order on June 19, the Supreme Court noted three key points: first, that the suspension of the ADGP was not a result of the High Court’s order; second, that the investigation could be transferred to another agency such as the CB-CID; and third, that the matter currently pending before the High Court could be transferred to a different bench for further consideration.

Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, representing the Tamil Nadu government, pointed out that as per the applicable rules, a police officer is required to be placed under suspension until the completion of an investigation. Advocate Aditya Kumar Choudhary appeared on behalf of the petitioner ADGP. After considering submissions from both parties, the Court reiterated in its order that the petitioner retains the legal remedy to challenge his suspension. Nonetheless, in view of the contentious circumstances under which the impugned High Court order was issued, the Court found it appropriate to direct the transfer of the investigation to CB-CID and requested that the matter be heard by a different bench of the High Court.

The background of the case involves an anticipatory bail application filed by KV Kuppam MLA “Poovai” Jagan Moorthy, who is accused in an abduction case registered by the Thiruvallur Police Station. The case stems from a complaint filed by a woman named Lakshmi, who stated that her elder son had married a girl without the consent of the girl’s family. Allegedly, members of the girl’s family, along with unidentified miscreants, entered Lakshmi’s home in search of her son. However, as her son and his wife had gone into hiding, the group allegedly abducted her younger son, who was 18 years old. According to Lakshmi’s complaint, the younger son was later found abandoned near a hotel and had sustained injuries. It was further alleged that the boy had been transported in the official vehicle of ADGP Jayaram, and that MLA Moorthy had conspired in the events.

Justice P. Velmurugan of the Madras High Court, while hearing the anticipatory bail plea, directed the police to take legal action against ADGP Jayaram, observing that as a public servant, he was accountable to the public. The judge emphasized that a strong message must be sent to society that no one is above the law.