Wednesday, July 9, 2014

Contempt, crime to arrest magistrate on RAPE charges. NO crime arresting common man !! MORE equal magistrates and plight of common men

A magistrate from Tamil Nadu was accused of Rape by his ex partner / girlfriend / paramour. According to the woman's complaint she and the magistrate, then an advocate, had marriage plans. After being appointed magistrate, he started avoiding her and on June 20, 2013, married another woman.

The cheated woman lodged a complaint with the Coonoor police accusing Thangaraj of rape. The complaint was forwarded to the Nilgiris principal district judge as required by law. No FIR was registered.

Later she filed a case with the police and police arrested the magistrate as is the usual practice in many such cases where woman allege / complain rape.

Now the HC of Madras has framed charges AGAINST THE POLICE for the arrest , probably after a heavy nudging by the lawyers !!!

What we fail to understand is why NOT such charges are framed when COMMON MEN are arrested and defamed by the police ????

***********************


TN cops face HC action for arresting magistrate (on rape charges by his ex girl friend / partner )

A Subramani,TNN | Jul 9, 2014, 01.53 AM IST

Source : times news network
A
A

CHENNAI: A little over a year ago, the state was rocked by the arrest of Coonoor judicial magistrate S Thangaraj on the complaint of a woman sub-inspector who alleged rape. Treating the arrest as an affront to the judiciary, the Madras high court initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against a woman superintendent of police R Ponni and four other police officers, including two DSPs.

On Tuesday, a division bench, comprising Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice M Sathyanarayanan, concluded that prima facie the SP and DSPs C Pitchai and Suresh Kumar had committed contempt of court. It outlined four key issues to be decided during trial, including whether there was any necessity to arrest the magistrate, and posted the matter to July 23.

According to the SI's complaint, she and Thangaraj, then an advocate, had marriage plans. After being appointed magistrate, he started avoiding her and on June 20, 2013, married another woman. The SI lodged a complaint with the Coonoor police accusing Thangaraj of rape. The complaint was forwarded to the Nilgiris principal district judge as required by law. No FIR was registered.

She then lodged a complaint with an all-woman station at Palladam in Tirupur district. It was following this complaint that Thangaraj was arrested on June 29, 2013.

As a controversy erupted, with bar associations leading agitations, the high court initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against five police officers, including Ponni. The bench said mandatory pre-arrest formalities such as intimating the district judge or putting the court on notice about the arrest had not been followed.

S Prabakaran, who represented bar associations, argued that the SI had suppressed the fact that there was no police action on her first complaint. While he said the magistrate was ill-treated, handcuffed and disallowed from contacting his lawyers and relatives, the police officers' senior counsel V Giri said the judge was extended due courtesies in custody.

The judges, making it clear that they would not comment on the complaint itself, dropped contempt charges against an inspector and SI saying they merely carried out orders of their superiors officers. But, superintendent of police Ponni ought to have been aware of the SC guidelines, governing such issues, they said, pointing out that if a judicial officer is to be arrested for some offence, it should be done after intimating the district judge or the high court. If necessary, a technical or formal arrest is enough and an arrested judge should not be taken to a police station without the prior order, the bench said or directions of the district judge. No statement should be recorded and he should not be subjected to any medical examination, it said. There should not be any handcuffing of the judicial officer either.

The bench then framed four issues to decide the contempt proceedings against the police officers. One, whether the officers failed to take effective and proper steps to inform the district judge before arresting Thangaraj; Two, is non-communication of the arrest to the district judge or the Chief Justice of the high court in violation of the apex court guidelines?; Three, whether the act of contemnors in not permitting Thangaraj to contact his legal advisers is in violation of apex court guidelines?; and Four, whether the contemnors had %established the necessity for effecting the physical arrest of the judicial officer?


*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/  FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases
  
  
regards
  
Vinayak
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist