Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

HC orders disciplinary action against Sessions Judge

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Madras High Court on Friday ordered disciplinary action against a Sessions Judge for ordering the rearrest of a person in an attempt to murder case, in which he had already spent five years in prison.

    A Division Bench comprising Justice P D Dinakaran and Justice R Regupathy directed the Registry to place the papers before the Chief Justice for further action in the matter. “We feel the lethargic attitude of the Sessions Judge in ignoring the cry of the detainee, the submission of Public Prosecutor and the letter of the Superintendent of Police, Central Prison, Vellore, stating that the detainee had completed the five year term, amounted to exercise of his judicial power negligently and recklessly,” said the Bench.

    One Thulasi was arrested by the Mylapore police on May 23, 1992, in an attempt to murder case. In 1997, the Additional Sessions Judge awarded him five years’ imprisonment. Thulasi moved an appeal and it was dismissed by the High Court on December 19, 2005. Though Thulasi was released on bail, he had meanwhile completed five years in prison.

    Ads by Google

    Following the High Court order, the Sessions Judge issued a non-bailable warrant to rearrest him, overlooking the fact that he had already served his sentence. Thulasi was rearrested and taken to a Central Prison on December 26, 2006.

    When Thulasi was rearrested, his wife moved a Habeas Corpus petition before the High Court. She also sought a compensation of Rs 5 lakh. The High Court had on April 21, 2007, directed the release of the detainee while ordering a compensation of Rs 5,000, to be paid to him by the state Government.

    The state contended that it was not responsible for his detention. In its present order, the Bench recalled the direction to the state Government to pay the compensation. The Bench said since Thulasi’s wife had also demanded a compensation of Rs 5 lakh in her plea, she could move this court by way of appropriate application without resorting to a separate legal action after impleading the officer concerned. The compensation to be awarded, if any, shall be subject to the result in the inquiry ordered to be initiated against the Judge, the Bench said.

    Judges AccountabilityBy: Shankar Lal Soni | 19-Sep-2009 Reply | Forward I5 iw very unfortunate that the judges inspite of being public servants are not held responsible for their functional inefficiency or incapacity and mususe of their power which is agaisnt equality of law guranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution. People must file petitions in High Courts udner Article 226 read with Article 51A(j) of the Constitution for actions agaisnt the inefficient, incapapble and corrupt jduges.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.