The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Wednesday, November 8, 2000,
Chandigarh, India

THE TRIBUNE SPECIALS

50 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE

TERCENTENARY CELEBRATIONS

M A I N N E W S

Strictures passed in Veerappan case
From Our Legal Correspondent

NEW DELHI, Nov 7 — A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Mr Justice S.P. Bharucha today set aside the orders of the designated courts at Mysore and Chennai relating to the withdrawal of TADA and NSA charges against the associates of forest brigand Veerappan, who set it as a precondition for the release of Kannada matinee idol Dr Rajkumar in his captivity since the past 100 days.

The judges while allowing the appeal of Mr Abdul Karim and two writ petitions challenging the said orders, however, stated, “The accused respondents may have individual grounds for challenging their continued prosecution of the TADA charges against them or for bail. They shall be free to adopt proceedings in that regard, if so advised.”

“Such proceedings shall be decided on their merits and nothing that we have said in this judgment shall stand in the way”, Mr Justice Bharucha delivering the judgement for himself and Mr Justice D.P. Mohapatra added. Mr Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, the third judge, delivered a separate but concurring judgment giving other reasons for the court’s verdict.

Referring to the appeal of Karim, whose only son a police official was killed by Veerappan and his aides along with 28 other officials in 1993, Mr Justice Bharucha said, “The locus standi of the present appellant has not been contested before us. Had it not been for his appeal, a miscarriage of justice would have become a fait accompli.”

Mr Justice Bharucha in his 44-page judgement held as bad in law the permissions granted by the special courts in Mysore and Chennai for the withdrawal of TADA charges and said the special public prosecutors of both the states had no opportunity to assess the primary material before making applications under Section 321 of the Cr PC for the said purpose and did not satisfy themselves as required under law.

“The Special Public Prosecutor, in fact, acted only upon the instructions of the government of the State of Karnataka. He, therefore, did not follow the requirements of the law that he be satisfied and the consent he sought under Section 321 cannot be granted by this court”, the judge held.

“The affidavit of the Special Public Prosecutor speaks of ‘withdrawal of the TADA charges which would enable the accused to file necessary bail applications and their consequent release on bail’. It is, thus, clear that what was envisaged by the Government of Karnataka and the SPP was a package which comprised of the withdrawal of TADA charges against the accused respondents and their release on bail”.

“This indicated complicity with the accused respondent. We deprecate the conduct of the Government of Karnataka and the SPP in this behalf. We deem it appropriate, in the facts and circumstances to set aside the orders granting bail to the accused respondents”, the judges ordered.

“Having set aside the order under Section 321 passed by the designated court at Chennai in the matter of Radio Venkatesan, the Government of Tamil Nadu cannot comply with Veerappan’s demand to release the five prisoners from its jails. It is appropriate in the circumstances to set aside the orders of the Government of Tamil Nadu under the National Security Act releasing the other four persons from detention”, the majority judges further ordered.

The judges observed, “While we cannot assert that conceding to Veerappan’s demands was a ploy of the Government of Karnataka to keep him out of the clutches of the law, we do find that it acted in panic and haste and without thinking things through in doing so. That this is so is clear from the fact that the Government of Karnataka did not ascertain the legal position that it was not for it but for the court to decide upon the release of persons facing criminal prosecutions.”

“What causes us the gravest disquiet is that when not so very long back as the record shows his gang had been considerably reduced Veerappan was not pursued and apprehended and now, as the statements in the affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Tamil Nadu show, Veerappan is operating in the forest that has been his hideout for 10 years or more along with secessionist Tamil elements. It seems to us certain that Veerappan will continue with his life of crime and very likely that those crimes will have anti-national objectives”, the judges further observed.

Mr Justice Sabharwal in his nine-page judgement said, “If democratically elected governments give the impression that citizens can be a law unto themselves it may lead to anarchy. Governments had to choose between law and anarchy. Pressure tactics to overawe the democratically elected governments, if yielded to, people may lose faith in the democratic process itself. Veerappan is in collusion with the secessionist forces who want a separate Tamil Nadu”.