Madras High Court
J.M.Gose vs /
Author: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
Bench: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on : 14.11.2022
Pronounced on: 25.11. 2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
W.P.(MD)No.21882 of 2022
J.M.Gose ... Petitioner
/vs./
1. The Superintendent of Police
Virudhunagar District
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Srivilliputhur,
Virudhunagar District
3. The Inspector of Police
Koomapatty Police Station,
Virudhunagar District ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the
records pertaining to the proceedings dated 18.08.2022 issued by the 2nd
respondent quash the same and consequently directing the Respondents to
forthwith grant permission to conduct Hunger Strike on any date at
1/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022
Ramasamypuram Ambedkar Statue and Koomapatty bus stand
Virudhunagar District within the time limit that may be stipulated by this
Hon'ble Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Krishnasamy
For Respondents : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The Petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the proceedings, dated 18.08.2022 issued by the second Respondent and quash the same and consequently, direct the Respondents to forthwith grant permission to conduct Hunger Strike on any date at Ramasamypuram Ambedkar Statue and Koomapatty bus stand, Virudhunagar District within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.
2. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that he has contributed Rs.32 lakhs to one KKSSR.Ramachandran who contested in the election for DMK candidate in Srivilliputhur Constituency for the year 2011 Legislative Assembly Election. The Petitioner belongs to Deivendra Kula Velalar Community which comes under the Scheduled 2/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 Caste. In order to show about the cheating to the Head, the Petitioner had went to Hunger Strike in Koomapatti on 10.04.2011 and at Chennai Arivalayam on 30.06.2012, but he did not get justice. Therefore, he gave a complaint to the first Respondent (Crime Branch), based on which, First Information Report was registered against KKSSR.Ramachandran and his henchmen in Crime No.100 of 2013 dated 22.02.2013 under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC in Aruppukottai Town Police Station. The said KKSSR.Ramachandran and his brother Subburaj obtained anticipatory bail. On 14.03.2013 around 08.30 pm., when the Petitioner was standing in Koomapatty bus stand, Malli Arumugam, Salamon, S/o. Ponnaiah who belongs to Mamsapuram DMK came and advised the Petitioner not to get dispute with higher persons and requested him to withdraw the complaint. They sent the Petitioner to a car where 1)KKSSR Ramachadran, 2)His brother Subburaj 3) his Son Ramesh were present and scolded the Petitioner stating his caste name and threatened him to withdraw the complaint, otherwise his whole family will be murdered. Since the Petition was not withdrawn, they took the Petitioner to Bangalore and abused him physically and mentally by poking cigarate all over the body and 3/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 threatened the Petitioner that they will burn him. Using the cellphone, the Petitioner gave information to the relatives. Based on that, on 19.04.2013, Habeus Corpus Petition was filed before this Court in H.C.P(MD)No.445 of 2013 and at that time, they left the Petitioner on 22.01.2013.
3. Thereafter on 26.01.2013, the Petitioner was admitted in Rajaji Hospital, Madurai. Based on the same, First Information Report was registered against them in Crime No.117 of 2013 for the offences under Sections 147, 365, 506(1) of IPC and Section 3(1)of SC/ST Act by Krishnan Kovil Police Station. Based on that, after getting bribe, the second Respondent had closed the case as ‘Mistake of Fact’ and filed a report before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Srivilliputhur in R.C.No.15 of 2013 on 31.08.2013. The fact was not disclosed to the Petitioner herein. When the Petitioner had filed private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., on 06.01.2017, the Petitioner came to know the same. Immediately on 12.02.2017, those persons sent notice seeking reply from the Petitioner. On the same date, the Petitioner gave his reply in Mistake of Fact and also preferred protest petition. After that, the 4/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 Respondent tried to put false case against the Petitioner, but they could not succeed.
4. The said KKSSR Ramachandran’s Advocate, namely, Mariappan had settlement talk with the Petitioner several times. The said KKSSR Ramachadran's Assistant namely Meesaipandi, Sattur, Advocate Murali came for that settlement talk and there was no response. Based on the settlement talk, they agreed to give the cheated amount of Rs.32 lakhs and reparation of Rs.20 lakhs with the total of Rs.52 lakhs in two installments along with posting to DMK Secretary in Watrap Union. Therefore, the Petitioner withdrew the case which was pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Srivilliputhur. After that, KKSSR Ramachandran’s Assistant Meesaipandi gave Rs.12 lakhs to the Petitioner as first installment and asked the Petitioner to withdraw the complaint which is pending in Aruppukottai Police Station.
5. In that situation, the Central Government had announced demonetization of Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/-. Therefore, they asked the 5/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 Petitioner six months time for handing over the amount. After six months time, the Petitioner contacted his Counsel. He threatened the Petitioner not to ask the balance amount and asked to contact Meesaipandi. The Petitioner contacted them several time, but they did not return the amount. Meanwhile, KKSSR.Ramachandran's brother Subburaj filed a joint compromise to quash the C.C.No.129 of 2014 in Crl.O.P(MD)No.14527 of 2014 in Crime No.100 of 2013. The Petitioner herein and one Subburaj filed a compromise quash petition before this Court and the same was allowed. The accused KKSSR Ramachandran and his brother had not signed in the compromise memo in the quash petition. Also they did not get any justice till date. Now, the Petitioner could not give complaint against the said KKSSR Ramachandran who had become Minister for Disaster Management and Revenue Department in the Tamil Nadu. If the Petitioner wants to give complaint against him and his cooliemen to the Police, the Police is threatening the Petitioner that they will put false case against the Petitioner. Also the Minister is threatening the Petitioner that he will murder the Petitioner using his cooliemen. After the Petitioner was cheated of 32 lakhs, the Citizen of India is struggling to give complaint 6/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 which is against the fundamental rights and also struggling day by day to get back the cheated amount for the past nine years.
6. In the meanwhile, on 19.08.2021, the Minister had came for some Government function in Tenkasi District and when the Petitioner asked the Minister’s brother namely Subburaj to meet the Minister. At that time, the Minister’s brother said that the Minister is not ready to meet him. Hence, the Petitioner has left the place. Nearly 6 to 9 members are following the Petitioner daily, threatening the Petitioner and his family members with dire consequences. Thereafter, the Petitioner sent representation dated 22.11.2020 to KKSSR through registered post. On 18.09.2021, the Petitioner sent representation to Chennai Commissioner for getting permission to protest against him in Chennai Arivalayam on 30.09.2021. The Petitioner preferred detailed representation on 30.09.2021 to the third Respondent in person and the same was received, but there is no action from the third Respondent. On 07.12.2021, the Petitioner lodged a representation to the Respondents 1 to 3 through post and the same was received, but there was no action from the Respondents concerned. 7/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022
7. The Petitioner approached the third Respondent. Even then, there is no action. The Respondents 1 to 3 are acting like a silent spectator. It is the duty cast upon the Respondents 1 to 3 to discharge their statutory duties in accordance with law. The Respondents 1 to 3 have not chosen to take any action on the basis of the complaint lodged against the said KKSSR Ramachandran. Whenever the Petitioner had approached the Respondents 1 to 3, they have been repeatedly driving the Petitioner from pillar to post. In these circumstances, on 09.05.2022, the Petitioner approached the Respondents to conduct hunger strike on 03.06.2022 against the abovesaid Minister who cheated Rs.32 lakhs. Being the citizen of the Country is struggling to give complaint which is against the fundamental rights. The representation of the Petitioner has been rejected by the second Respondent by the impugned proceedings dated 27.05.2022. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner has sought direction from this Court to direct the Respondents to grant permission to conduct protest near Ramasamypuram Amdedkar Statue and Koomapatti bus stand. 8/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022
8. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner invited the attention of this Court to the proceedings of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District, dated 18.08.2022. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner invited the attention of this Court to the contents of the First Information Report in Crime No.100 of 2013 on the file of the Arupukottai Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District, dated 22.02.2013. He also invited the attention of this Court to the complaint given by the Petitioner. The relevant portion of the complaint reads as follows:
“ .........vd;id njhiyNgrpapy; nfhiy kpul;ly; tpLj;jhh;. mjd; gpwF vjph;kDjhuULD; ,Uf;Fk; fl;rp nghWg;ghsh;fspd; xd;wpa nrayhsh; ky;yp MWKfk; > kk;rhGuk; Ng&h; fof jpKf nrayhsh; cja#hpad;
Mfpa ,UtUk; Nrh;e;J Neubahf uTbfSld;
vd;Dila tPl;bw;F te;J vd;dplk; ,dpNkYk;
ePjpkd;wj;jpy; tof;F> cz;zhtpujk; Nghd;w nraypy;
<Lgl;lhy; vq;fs; jiytUk; vjph;kDUhh; cd;id
rpd;dhgpzkhf Mf;fptpl vq;fSf;F
fl;lisapl;Ls;shh; vd;W $wp vdf;F FLk;gj;jhUf;Fk; nfhiy kpul;ly; tpLj;jhh;fs;. mjd; gwpF ehd; vd;
capUf;F gae;J jiykiwT tho;f;if tho;e;J
tUfpd;Nwd;. ,jdhy; ehd; kw;Wk; vdJ
FLk;gj;jhh;fs; kpFe;j kd cisr;ry; mile;J
9/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022
fld; Rikahy; kpFe;j kdtUj;jj;jpy; tho;e;J
tUfpd;Nwd;. vdNt Nkw;gb vjphpfs; kPJ ,e;jpa
jz;lid rl;lk; gphpTfs; 294(b),420,506(i), 506(ii) 417 of IPC and SC/ST Act Section 3(x) Mfpa gphpTfspd; fPo;
vjph;kDjhuhpd; kPJ tof;F gjpT nra;J jf;f
eltbf;if vLj;J vdJ gzj;ij kPl;L jUkhW
vdf;F kw;Wk; FLk;gj;jhh;fs; clikf;F ve;j
Neuj;jpYk; mr;RUj;jy; ,Ug;gjhYk; vjphpfs; murpay; kw;Wk; gzgyk;> Ms;gyk; cs;sth;fshf ,Ug;gjhYk;
cldbahf vdJ capUf;Fk;> clikf;Fk; kw;Wk;
vdJ FLk;gj;jhUf;Fk; ghJfhg;G toq;fp vjphpfs;
kPJ jd;f eltbf;if vLf;FkhW gzpTld;
Nfl;Lf;nfhs;fpNwd;.”
9. He also invited the attention of this Court to the petition filed by the Petitioner/Respondent in Crl.O.P(MD) No.14527 of 2014 dated 11.07.2017 and the relevant portion of the order reads as follows:
“6. Having regard to the agreement made between the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. As per the Compromise Memo signed by the parties, the defacto complainant, namely, the second respondent has agreed to quash the proceedings even against the first 10/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 accused. Hence the criminal proceedings culminating in C.C.No.129 of 2014 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukottai, is quashed in toto and the Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order”
10. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that he was made to believe that he will be paid the amount, instead they resiled on their promise. Therefore, the Petitioner is seeking permission to conduct hunger strike to protest against the Minister and his Members. He also filed a Writ Petition in WP(MD) No. 11932 of 2022 which was disposed of by the learned Single Judge of this Court, dated 14.06.2022.
11. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that Crl.O.P(MD)No.14527 of 2014 was filed by A2. This Court has quashed the charge sheet since the parties have arrived at compromise.
Subsequently, the Petitioner had filed a petition in W.P(MD)No.11632 of 2022 which was disposed of by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 11/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 14.06.2022. He would further submit that the petition lacks merits and it is liable to be dismissed. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor invited the attention of this Court to the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P(MD)No.11632 of 2022, dated 14.06.2022. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows:
“ 7.In view of above submission, it is clear that the second respondent has dismissed the said application on the ground that law and order problem may arise due to the agitation, which is against the sitting Minister. Admittedly, if any money transaction had taken place for getting Member of Legislative Assembly Seat and Party Secretary Post, the petitioner may initiate appropriate legal proceedings against the concerned persons. For the said purpose, agitating in the public place and conducting hunger strike against the sitting Minister, definitely will create law and order problem. Therefore, for this purpose, the second respondent cannot be directed to give permission to conduct the hunger strike. However, for any public cause, hunger strike may be permitted, but for an individual dispute, hunger strike at public place cannot be permitted.
8.Therefore, I find no illegality in the impugned order passed by the second respondent. Hence, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. However, if the petitioner gives a fresh representation to the second respondent for conducting any 12/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 peaceful agitation without causing hindrance to the public, that representation may be considered by the second respondent.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed
12. In the light of the above, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor sought to dismiss the Petition as it is not maintainable. It is filed only to cause embarrassment and harassment to the Minister. The petition is ill-conceived for publicity.
13. On consideration of rival submissions and perusal of records, the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeking to quash the proceedings of the second Respondent and seeking direction to the Respondents 1 to 3 to organize hunger strike before Ramasamy Ambedkar Statue and Koomapatti bus stand, cannot be entertained. It is found to be nothing but to harass the Respondents. Having entered appearance and making the Court to believe that the dispute had been settled amicably between the parties, the Petitioner cannot now go back on the said conduct. The contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner cannot 13/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 be accepted, particularly, in the light of the orders passed by this Crl.O.P(MD) No.14527 of 2014 and W.P(MD) No.11632 of 2022
14. This is the second round of litigation for the same cause of action. Therefore, this Writ Petition is dismissed with costs.
In the result the Writ Petition stands dismissed with costs. The Petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards costs to the Legal Services Authority attached to this Bench.
25 .11.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No aav TO:
1. The Superintendent of Police Virudhunagar District
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District 14/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022
3. The Inspector of Police Koomapatty Police Station, Virudhunagar District
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5.The Registrar (Judicial), Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.15/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.21882 of 2022 SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
aav W.P.(MD)No.21882 of 2022 25 .11.2022 16/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis