Multiple FIRs in Thoothokudi riots case opposed

  • | Saturday | 28th July, 2018

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Friday continued to hear arguments on petitions filed in the Thoothukudi riots case. Presenting his arguments against multiple FIRs, Senior Counsel M. Ajmal Khan said that the whole incident was one occurrence and subsequent FIRs could not be registered. Advocate Henri Tiphagne, presenting his arguments, reiterated that the Collector was absent on the day of the crisis. Under Article 48A of the Constitution, the State should endeavour to protect and improve the environment and safeguard forest and wildlife. Under Article 51 A (g), the State should protect the natural environment, he said.

more-in The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Friday continued to hear arguments on petitions filed in the Thoothukudi riots case. Presenting his arguments against multiple FIRs, Senior Counsel M. Ajmal Khan said that the whole incident was one occurrence and subsequent FIRs could not be registered. There could not be a second FIR as it could lead to double jeopardy, he said. Replying to the State’s argument made on Thursday which questioned the maintainability of public interest litigation petitions, he said that the petitions were maintainable as they sought enforcement of legal rights of individuals who could not come before the court to seek relief. Advocate Henri Tiphagne, presenting his arguments, reiterated that the Collector was absent on the day of the crisis. It was the Sub-Collector who had convened a peace meeting prior to the 100th day incident, he said. People were not merely agitating, they were calling out for the protection of environment which is a Constitutional right. Under Article 48A of the Constitution, the State should endeavour to protect and improve the environment and safeguard forest and wildlife. Under Article 51 A (g), the State should protect the natural environment, he said. There was no district administration on the day of the crisis. The people of Thoothukudi had been constantly put to hardship, Mr. Tiphagne said, while calling for a judicial scrutiny of the arrests and remand. It was the lower level policeman who were always pulled up. The higher officials were to be held accountable here, he said. There should be principles followed in the use of firearms and management of assemblies. He said that petitions should be kept pending in order to ensure continuous monitoring of the situation. A division bench of Justices C. T. Selvam and A. M. Basheer Ahamed heard the arguments. The court will continue to hear arguments on Monday.

If You Like This Story, Support NYOOOZ

NYOOOZ SUPPORTER

NYOOOZ FRIEND

Your support to NYOOOZ will help us to continue create and publish news for and from smaller cities, which also need equal voice as much as citizens living in bigger cities have through mainstream media organizations.


Stay updated with all the Latest Madurai headlines here. For more exclusive & live news updates from all around India, stay connected with NYOOOZ.

Related Articles

‘Use ITPS to track post’
  • Tuesday | 16th October, 2018
Suspension term reduced
  • Tuesday | 16th October, 2018
Vacation court
  • Tuesday | 16th October, 2018