மாணவியருக்கு பாலியல் தொந்தரவு : கிறிஸ்தவ போதகரின் காப்பகம் மூடல்
தினமலர், மாணவியருக்கு பாலியல் தொந்தரவு : கிறிஸ்தவ போதகரின் காப்பகம் மூடல், செப்டம்பர் 27, 2010, http://www.dinamalar.com/News_Detail.asp?Id=94245
கிருத்துவக் காமுகனும், அவனது இரண்டு மகன்களும்: தூத்துக்குடி : திருச்செந்தூர் அருகே பள்ளி மாணவியருக்கு, பாலியல் தொந்தரவு தந்த கிறிஸ்தவ போதகர் நடத்திய காப்பகம் மூடப்பட்டது. அது, அனுமதியின்றி செயல்பட்டது, விசாரணையில் தெரிய வந்துள்ளது. கிறிஸ்தவ மதபோதகர் சவுந்தரராஜன் மற்றும் இந்த காமுகனின் இரண்டு மகன்கள் ஜெபஸ்டின் கிறிஸ்டோபர் மற்றொரு மகன் உதய பால ஜெபசிங்!
ஆதியாகத்தின் படி நடந்த தந்தை-தனயர்: திருச்செந்தூர் அருகே தட்டார்மடம் அடுத்த மணிநகரில் தனியார் தோட்டத்தில், கிறிஸ்தவ மதபோதகர் சவுந்தரராஜன் (56), கடந்த ஏழு ஆண்டுகளாக ஜெபக்கூடம் நடத்தி வருகிறார். இவருக்கு உதவியாக மகன் ஜெபஸ்டின் கிறிஸ்டோபர் (25) இருந்து வருகிறார். அதனுள்ளேயே, சவுந்தரராஜன் நடத்திய காப்பகத்தில் கோவை, ஈரோடு, ஓசூர் உள்ளிட்ட பகுதிகளைச் சேர்ந்த ஆதரவற்ற, ஏழை மாணவர்கள் 22 பேரும், மாணவியர் 12 பேரும் தங்கியிருந்தனர்.
இரவு நேரத்தில் பாலியல் தொந்தரவு: அவர்கள், அருகிலுள்ள பள்ளிகளில் படித்தனர். அங்கு மாணவியர் பலருக்கு, இரவு நேரத்தில் பாலியல் தொந்தரவு தரப்படுவதாக தொடர்ந்து புகார் வந்தது. அங்கு செப்., 24 இரவு போலீஸ், சமூக நலத்துறை அதிகாரிகள் சோதனை நடத்தி, அங்கிருந்த சிறுவர், சிறுமியரை மீட்டு, ஸ்ரீவைகுண்டம் அரசு விடுதிக்கு அனுப்பினர்.
இயற்கைக்கு மாறான வழியில் அவர்களுக்கு பாலியல் தொந்தரவு: தூத்துக்குடி மாவட்ட சமூகநல அலுவலர் முத்துநாயகம், புகாரில், மதபோதகர் சவுந்தரராஜன், மகன் கிறிஸ்டோபர் கைது செய்யப்பட்டனர். மாணவியரை கட்டாயப்படுத்தி, இயற்கைக்கு மாறான வழியில் அவர்களுக்கு பாலியல் தொந்தரவு தந்ததாகவும், அதை வெளியே சொல்லக் கூடாது என, மிரட்டியதாகவும் கைதானவர்கள் வாக்குமூலமளித்தனர். தலைமறைவாக உள்ள சவுந்தரராஜனின் மற்றொரு மகன் உதய பால ஜெபசிங்கை போலீசார் தேடுகின்றனர்.
அனுமதி இல்லாத காப்பகம் மூடல்: இதுகுறித்து, தூத்துக்குடி கலெக்டர் பிரகாஷ் கூறியதாவது: மாவட்டத்தில் மொத்தம் 72 தனியார் காப்பகங்கள் உள்ளது தெரிந்துள்ளது. அவற்றில், 35 காப்பகங்கள் முறையான அனுமதி பெற்றுள்ளன. மேலும், சில அனுமதிக்காக விண்ணப்பித்துள்ளன. ஆனால், பாலியல் புகாரில் இருவர் கைது செய்யப்பட்ட அந்த காப்பகம் அனுமதி பெறாமல் நடந்துவந்துள்ளது.
காப்பகம் பெயரில் தொடர்ந்து இப்படி செக்ஸ் கூடங்கள் இயங்குவது சந்தேகமாக உள்ளது: அந்த காப்பகம் மூடப்பட்டுவிட்டது. எதிர்காலத்தில் இதுபோன்ற பிரச்னைகளை தவிர்க்கும் பொருட்டு, காப்பகங்களின் உரிமையாளர் யார், அதில் எத்தனை பேர் உள்ளனர் என்பன போன்ற முழுவிவரங்கள் அடங்கிய தகவல் அருகிலுள்ள போலீஸ் ஸ்டேஷன்களில் சேகரித்து வைக்கப்படும். இதற்காக வருவாய்த்துறை,சமூகநலத்துறை, போலீஸ்துறை உள்ளிட்ட அதிகாரிகள் அடங்கிய கூட்டுக்குழு கூட்டம் விரைவில் நடத்தப்படவுள்ளது. இவ்வாறு கலெக்டர் கூறினார்.
குறிச்சொற்கள்: ஃபிடோஃபைல், அந்தப்புரம், கத்தோலிக்க செக்ஸ், கன்னியாஸ்திரீ, கற்பழிப்பு, கிருத்துவ சாமியார், கிருத்துவ பாதிரியார், சரசம், சல்லாபம், பாலியல், மர்ஃபி அறிக்கை, வாடிகன்
இந்தியாவில் கிருத்துவம் 
3:42 பிப இல் செப்ரெம்பர் 28, 2010 |
மாணவியரிடம் பாலியல் தொந்தரவு : ஆசிரியர்கள் இடமாற்றம்
பிப்ரவரி 23,2010,00:00 IST
http://www.dinamalar.com/Incident_detail.asp?news_id=16522
அந்தியூர் : மாணவியரிடம் பாலியல் தொந்தரவு புரிந்ததாக புகாரில் சிக்கிய அந்தியூர் பெண்கள் பள்ளி ஆசிரியர்கள் இருவர் உட்பட, மூன்று பேர், இடமாற்றம் செய்யப்பட்டனர்.
ஈரோடு மாவட்டம் அந்தியூர் அரசு பெண்கள் மேல்நிலைப் பள்ளியில் 1,600க்கும் மேற்பட்ட மாணவியர் படிக்கின்றனர். தலைமையாசிரியர் உட்பட 20க்கும் மேற்பட்ட ஆசிரியர்கள் பணிபுரிகின்றனர். 19ம் தேதி, மாணவியரிடம் பாலியல் தொந்தரவில் ஈடுபட்டதாக, பொருளியல் ஆசிரியர் சுப்பிரமணியம், ஆங்கில ஆசிரியர் ஜான்பெடரிக் ஆகியோர் மீது புகார் எழுந்தது. இவர்களை பணிநீக்கம் செய்ய வலியுறுத்தி, மார்க்சிஸ்ட் கட்சியினர் ஆர்ப்பாட்டத்தில் ஈடுபட்டனர். மாணவியரிடமும், ஆசிரியைகளிடமும் தனித்தனியே நடந்த விசாரணை அறிக்கையை, கலெக்டருக்கு ஆர்.டி.ஓ., அனுப்பினார். பள்ளியில் பணிபுரியும் ஆசிரியை, தனக்கு நேர்ந்த தொந்தரவுகளை, ஆர்.டி.ஓ.,விடம் கண்ணீர் மல்க கூறினார். தொடர்ந்து, 20ம் தேதி, சி.இ.ஓ., பொன்குமார், பள்ளியில் நேரடி விசாரணை மேற்கொண்டார்.
விசாரணையில், பொருளியல் ஆசிரியர் சுப்பிரமணியம், ஆங்கில ஆசிரியர் ஜான் பெடரிக் ஆகியோர், மாணவியரிடம் உணர்ச்சியை தூண்டக்கூடிய வார்த்தைகள் பேசியதும், பாலியல் தொந்தரவு செய்து வந்ததும் தெரிந்தது. அதோடு, இது பற்றி வெளியே கூறினால், பிராக்டிகல் மார்க்கில் கைவைத்து விடுவதாக ஆசிரியர் மிரட்டியதும் தெரிந்தது. மாணவியருக்கு மட்டுமின்றி, பள்ளியில் பணிபுரியும் சக ஆசிரியைக்கும் இதுபோன்ற தொந்தரவு கொடுத்து மிரட்டியதாகவும், தகவல் வெளியானது. இதையடுத்து, பாலியல் தொந்தரவு செய்த பொருளியல் ஆசிரியர் சுப்பிரமணியம், நம்பியூர் அரசு ஆண்கள் மேல்நிலைப் பள்ளிக்கும், ஆங்கில ஆசிரியர் ஜான் பெடரிக் சத்தியமங்கலம் அரசு ஆண்கள் மேல்நிலைப் பள்ளிக்கும், இடமாற்றம் செய்யப்பட்டனர். இவர்கள் இருவர் நடவடிக்கையையும் கண்காணிக்காமல் இருந்த உதவி தலைமையாசிரியர் ஜெயச்சந்திரன், பவானி அரசு ஆண்கள் மேல்நிலைப்பள்ளிக்கு இடமாற்றம் செய்யப்பட்டார். கடந்த சனிக்கிழமை நடந்த விசாரணைக்கு பின், இந்நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கப்பட்டதாக, பள்ளி தலைமையாசிரியர் செங்கோட்டையன் கூறினார்.
ஆசிரியர் கைது: மதுரை மாவட்டம், திருங்கலம் சின்னக்கடை வீதியைச் சேர்ந்தவர் கணேஷ் மாறன்(32). இவர், தனியார் பள்ளியில் தற்காலிக கம்ப்யூட்டர் ஆசிரியராக வேலை பார்த்தார். ஐந்தாம் வகுப்பு மாணவியரிடம் அடிக்கடி சில்மிஷம் செய்து வந்தார். இதை கண்டித்து, நேற்று காலை பள்ளி முன், 20க்கும் மேற்பட்ட மாணவியரின் பெற்றோர் முற்றுகையிட்டனர். பின், திருமங்கலம் – மதுரை ரோட்டில் டி.எஸ்.பி., அலுவலகம் அருகே மறியல் செய்தனர். எஸ்.ஐ., மற்றும் போலீசார் பேச்சு வார்த்தை நடத்தினர். மறியலை கைவிட்ட பெற்றோர், திருமங்கலம் டவுன் போலீசில் புகார் கூறினர். கணேஷ் மாறன் கைது செய்யப்பட்டார். ஆசிரியரை பள்ளி நிர்வாகம் டிஸ்மிஸ் செய்தது.
3:44 பிப இல் செப்ரெம்பர் 28, 2010 |
மாணவியருக்கு பாலியல் துன்புறுத்தல் : ஆசிரியர் பணி நீக்கத்தை உறுதி செய்து தீர்ப்பு
பதிவு செய்த நாள் : செப்டம்பர் 07,2010,23:13 IST
http://www.dinamalar.com/News_Detail.asp?Id=79839
புதுடில்லி : மாணவியரை பாலியல் ரீதியாக துன்புறுத்திய ஆசிரியரை பணி நீக்கம் செய்தது செல்லும் என, சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட் தெரிவித்துள்ளது.
மேற்கு வங்க மாநிலம், கோல்கட்டா அருகே உள்ள கேந்திரிய வித்யாலயாவில் இசை ஆசிரியராக இருந்தவர் ரதின் பால். இவர் தன்னிடம் படித்த ஐந்தாம் வகுப்பு மாணவியரிடம் தகாத முறையில் நடந்து கொண்டார். இது குறித்து மாணவியரின் பெற்றோர், பள்ளி நிர்வாகத்திடம் புகார் தெரிவித்தனர். இதையடுத்து, பள்ளி நிர்வாகம் ஒன்பது பேர் கொண்ட ஆசிரியர் குழுவை நியமித்து விசாரணை நடத்தியது. விசாரணையில் ஆசிரியர் தவறாக நடந்து கொண்டது உண்மை என தெரிய வந்தது. இதைத் தொடர்ந்து, கல்வி அதிகாரிக்கு இந்த தகவல் தரப்பட்டு, அவரும் தனிப்பட்ட முறையில் விசாரணை நடத்தினார். ஆசிரியர் ரதின் பால், மாணவியருக்கு செக்ஸ் தொல்லை கொடுத்தது உறுதியானது. இதையடுத்து, ரதின் பால் டிஸ்மிஸ் செய்யப்பட்டார்.
இதை எதிர்த்து ரதின்பால், கோல்கட்டா ஐகோர்ட்டில் வழக்கு தொடர்ந்தார். “ரதின் பாலை அதிரடியாக பள்ளியிலிருந்து நீக்கியது செல்லாது; அவரை பள்ளியில் மீண்டும் சேர்த்துக் கொள்ள வேண்டும். பணி நீக்கம் செய்யப்பட்ட காலத்துக்குரிய 40 சதவீத சம்பளத்தையும் அவருக்கு அளிக்க வேண்டும்’ என, ஐகோர்ட் உத்தரவிட்டது. இந்த உத்தரவை எதிர்த்து கல்வி அதிகாரி, சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட்டில் மேல் முறையீடு செய்தார். இந்த மனுவை நீதிபதிகள் ஜி.எஸ்.சிங்வி, அசோக்குமார் கங்குலி ஆகியோர் அடங்கிய பெஞ்ச் விசாரித்தது. “ஆசிரியைகள் அடங்கிய குழு ஒவ்வொரு மாணவியிடமும் தீர விசாரித்து, ரதின் பாலின் குற்றத்தை உறுதி செய்துள்ளது. கல்வி அதிகாரியும் தனது பங்குக்கு விசாரணை நடத்தியுள்ளார். அதிலும் இரு மாணவியரை ரதின் பால் மிரட்டியதை இக்குழுவிடம் பெற்றோர் பதிவு செய்துள்ளனர். சதியால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டது போல ரதின் பால் சார்பில் கூறிய போதும், அதை அவர் நிரூபிக்கவில்லை. எனவே, ரதின் பாலை பணி நீக்கம் செய்தது செல்லும்’ என, நீதிபதிகள் தங்கள் தீர்ப்பில் தெரிவித்துள்ளனர்.
3:49 பிப இல் செப்ரெம்பர் 28, 2010 |
City orphanage girls molested by founder
September 13th, 2010
DC Correspondent
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/hyderabad/city-orphanage-girls-molested-founder-349
Sept. 12: The founder of an orphanage was arrested by the Vanasthalipuram police on Sunday for sexually harassing eight minor girls who lived and studied at his institution.
M. Malyadri, 37, of Prakasam district, was the founder and secretary of Siria Orphanage Home and School located near Ganesh Temple in TV Colony here and initial investigation revealed that Malyadri had outraged the modesty of eight girls though the police suspect that there might be more victims.
“There are 135 orphans in the hostel of whom 95 are girls. Malyadri also runs a school, Siria Orphans Residential School, where he provides education for nursery to Class IX students residing in his orphanage,” said the Vanasthalipuram inspector, Mr B. Ravinder Reddy.
“Malyadri stayed in an office on the hostel premises. While drunk at night, he used to call students of classes VII, VIII and IX to his office room. He then touched and pinched them on their private parts. If a girl refused to go to the office he used to beat them and exploit them sexually,” added the Vanastalipuram ACP, Mr B. Srinivas Reddy.
There are also reports that he used to force them to participate in sex and if they didn’t obey him he used to spit on their faces. “There are many allegations and we are investigating. We have sent the girls for medical examinations. As per the complaint lodged by the girls, we have registered a case under Section 354 (outrage of modesty) of IPC and have started investigation,” he said.
3:51 பிப இல் செப்ரெம்பர் 28, 2010 |
‘Orphanage head indulged in homosexuality’
Abdul Rabi
First Published : 06 Jul 2010 03:14:17 AM IST
Last Updated : 06 Jul 2010 06:12:59 AM IST
http://expressbuzz.com/states/tamilnadu/orphanage-head-indulged-in-homosexuality/187365.html
TIRUNELVELI: The arrested Arumai Packiam Maunel Orphanage head Justine had indulged in homosexuality and voyeurism while orphanage girls were bathing, besides involving the kids in begging, according to sources.
Justine (40) of Arumai Packiam Manuel Orphanage at Poojapiraiviali in Kanyakumari district was arrested on Sunday on charges sexual harassment after the raid conducted by the Child Welfare Committee and Social Welfare Department which rescued 32 children from the unrecognised orphanage. The rescued children have been temporarily placed at child reception unit at Saranalayam in Tirunelveli.Sources said that 75 per cent of the children were below the age of 14. Among them 18 were girls and 14 were boys. During preliminary investigation, the children had openly said that the orphanage head had indulged in homosexual activities with male children and also watched the female children having bath.He could be seen loitering near the bathrooms between 7 am and 9 am.
Another shocking revelation was that he touched their body parts on the pretext of applying soap.
He had also taken the kids to Uvari, Madurai and other places for begging. After obtaining the social investigation report, the fate of the children would be decided, the sources added.
4:08 பிப இல் செப்ரெம்பர் 28, 2010 |
In September, 1997 the Tamil Nadu Police arrested the 52-year-old Christian priest Father John Joseph and four of his aides, including two women, on charges of murder, rape and kidnapping. Father John Joseph arrest exposed a trail of murder and sexual abuse. Christian priest had a Christian prayer cenre called Yesu of Marthandam,some 50 km north of Kanyakumari and this Christian priest calls himself as swamiyar to attract Hindus.
The priest was once arrested in July 97, along with centre’s administrator Joseph Alphons and two others, for non-repayment of loans amounting to Rs 80 lakh taken in 1994. They all managed to secure bail then. Fransiscal Jaya, Alphons’ wife and a former inmate of the Christian ashram complained that in November 1996 the priest had attempted to rape her 14-year-old daughter Diana, a class ix student of the prayer centre’s Maranatha Residential School in the same complex. She also said that Gilbert Raj, 18, of the centre,was murdered by the priest in 1994.
4:10 பிப இல் செப்ரெம்பர் 28, 2010 |
TAMIL NADU Unholy Messenger
Father John Joseph’sA priest’s arrest exposes a trail of murder and sexual abuse. By M.G. Radhakrishnan
http://www.india-today.com/itoday/06101997/tamilnad.html
The Yesu of Marthandam, it seems, has run out of miracles. Not long ago, frenzied sessions saw his ‘devotees’ — over 5,000 of them, mainly Roman catholic women from the local fishing community near Kanyakumari — spellbound as he sang in praise of the Lord. Many would go into hysteria, sob uncontrollably, faint and, at the end of it all, even claim that they had been cured of the most serious of illnesses. Today, but for a lone fox and some peacocks and doves, Father John Joseph’s sprawling Charismatic Centre, 50 km north of Kanyakumari, wears a deserted look.
Two weeks ago, the Tamil Nadu Police arrested the 52-year-old Father and four of his aides, including two women, on charges of murder, rape and kidnapping. If the arrest wasn’t totally unexpected, it was because once before in July, he, along with the centre’s chief administrator Joseph Alphons and two others, was arrested for non-repayment of loans amounting to Rs 80 lakh taken in 1994. Then, they had all managed to secure bail after furnishing statements, promising to clear the dues. This time, however, the Father wasn’t so lucky.
His recent arrest follows a complaint by Fransiscal Jaya, Alphons’ wife and a former inmate of the ashram. She alleged that in November last year, the priest had attempted to rape her 14-year-old daughter Diana, a class ix student of the centre’s prestigious Maranatha Residential School in the same complex. She also alleged that the death of Gilbert Raj, 18, an inmate of the centre, in 1994, was due to “sexual persecution”. Following the charges, the police exhumed Raj’s body from the campus cemetery.
Enraged villagers tried to set fire to the centre. They had already submitted around 30 petitions to the police regarding the non-payment of loans and pasted posters all over the town denouncing the Father, who was expelled from the local diocese for anti-religious activities in 1995. The police say that the Father and his aides were involved in large-scale financial swindling. Says Vincent of Imperial Bankers, a money-lending institution at Nagercoil: “Not a paisa of the Rs 15 lakh loan we had advanced has been repaid.”
But reports of bizarre happenings had started trickling out of the centre even before that. About how Joseph would ask young boys to have sex with women inmates much older than them. And how they would be beaten up if they refused. Two such young men, Rajesh and Darwin, lodged a complaint with the police alleging sexual torture. “Swamiyar (Joseph) used to force me to have sex with women who were thrice my age while he watched,” alleges Rajesh, 18, who worked for the centre for three years till 1995. “Unable to take any more, I ran away.” Police suspect that Raj died of similar torture and claim to have proof of the sexual orgies at the centre. They are on the lookout for a lady doctor who is believed to have conducted several abortions on the campus. Says Shylesh Kumar Yadav, joint sp, Thuckalay, who is in charge of the investigations: “We have sufficient evidence to prove all the charges, including murder, rape and attempt to rape, to have Father Joseph convicted.”
Despite persistent rumours of strange goings-on at the centre, nobody considered filing a complaint against the Father earlier, as they were taken in by his charisma. Alphons claims that his wife’s complaint about the rape attempt on their daughter was made only recently because she came to know about it in July. “I was so attracted by Father Joseph’s magnetic personality that I would never believe such things,” he says. As for the case of non-payment of loans — in which Alphons has now been made an approver — he says: “My repeated requests for repayment of loans were ignored by him and I was left to face the creditors.”
The centre’s assets, according to the police, are worth around Rs 4 crore. Though all activities at the centre have come to a halt, the Maranatha Residential School, one of the more expensive in the area where the students pay fees of about Rs 900 per month, is still functioning. But since the Father’s arrest several students have left.
With so much at stake, counter-charges are flying thick and fast. “It is Alphons who has siphoned off the money and to escape trouble has made his wife issue a trumped-up complaint,” says the Father’s sister Angela, whose husband, a managing trustee of the centre, is among those arrested. And despite the mounting pile of evidence against the Father, she believes the “Lord will prove his innocence”. Evidently, she still believes in miracles.
4:14 பிப இல் செப்ரெம்பர் 28, 2010 |
JOHN JOSEPH versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVT.
High Court of Madras
Case Law Search
Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation
Judgement
John Joseph v. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Secretary to Govt. – Writ Petition No.15595 of 1998 [2002] RD-TN 778 (3 October 2002)
http://www.rishabhdara.com/sc/view.php?case=72630
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 03/10/2002
Coram
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. KARPAGAVINAYAGAM Writ Petition No.15595 of 1998
and W.P.Nos.15596 and 18995 of 1997 and 1285, 1569, 1570 and 4283 of 1998 and
W.M.P.No.24751 and 24752 of 1997 and 2256, 2257 and 6542 of 1998 W.P.Nos.15595 and 15596 of 1997:
John Joseph ..Petitioner -Vs-
1. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Secretary to Govt., Home Department,
Fort St. George, hennai-9.
2. Director General of Police,
Government Estate, Chennai-2.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
4. Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Special Branch, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil Town,
Kanyakumari District.
6. Joint Superintendent of Police,
Thuckalay, Kanyakumari District.
7. Inspector of Police,
Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District.
8. Premkumar
9. Panneerselvam
10.Shailesh Yadav, I.P.S. 11.Kaliamoorthy .. Respondents W.P.No.18995 of 1997:
1. N.Nirmala
2. T. Darwin .. Petitioners. -Vs-
1. Secretary to Govt., Home Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
3. The Inspector of Police, Kuzhithurai Police Station, Kanyakumari.
4. Sailesh Kumar Yadav
5. Prem Kumar
6. Kaliamurthy
7. Joseph Alphones .. Respondents. W.P.No.1285 of 1998:
1. G. Ambrose
2. Ronickam .. Petitioners -Vs-
1. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Secretary to Govt., Home Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2. Kuzhithurai Police Station, Kanyakumari.
3. Premkumar
4. Panneerselvam
5. Shailesh Kumar Yadav
6. Kaliamoorthy .. Respondents W.P.No.1569 of 1998:
Fr.John Joseph ..Petitioner Vs.
1. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Secretary to Govt., Home Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2. Director General of Police,
Government Estate, Chennai-2.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
4. Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Special Branch, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. 5. The Deput Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil Town,
Kanyakumari District.
6. Joint Superintendent of Police, Thuckalay,
Kanyakumari District.
7. Inspector of Police, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District.
8. Abash Kumar, I.P.S.
9. Premkumar 10. Panneerselvam
11. Shailesh Kumar Yadav, I.P.S.
12.Kaliamoorthy .. Respondents
W.P.No.1570 of 1998:
Santhanakrishnan .. Petitioner. Vs.
1. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Secretary to Govt., Home Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2. Director General of Police, Government Estate, Chennai-2.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
4. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Branch,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil Town, Kanyakumari District.
6. Joint Superintendent of Police, Thuckalay, Kanyakumari District.
7. Inspector of Police, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District.
8. Abash Kumar, I.P.S.
9. Premkumar 10.Panneerselvam
11. Shailesh Kumar Yadav, I.P.S.
12.Kaliamoorthy
13.Joseph Alphones
14. Fransiscal Jeya .. Respondents W.P.No.4283 of 1998:
Rani .. Petitioner Vs
1. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by Secretary
to Govt., Home Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2. Director General of Police, Government Estate, Chennai-2.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Special Branch, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil Town,
Kanyakumari District.
6. Joint Superintendent of Police, Thuckalay,
Kanyakumari District.
7. Inspector of Police, Kuzhithurai,
Kanyakumari District.
8. Nanjilkumaran, I.P.S.
9. Abash Kumar, I.P.S.
10.Premkumar
11.Panneerselvam
12.Shailesh Kumar Yadav, I.P.S.
13.Kaliamoorthy .. Respondents Writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of Writ of Mandamus and Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus as stated therein.
For Petitioners in all the W.Ps. :Mr. V. Selvaraj W.P.Nos.15595 & 15596/1997:
For Respondents 1 to 7 : Mr. S. Vadivel, G.A. For Respondent No.8 : Mr.R. Kannan
For Respondent No.9 :Mr.K. Kulandaivelu
For Respondents 13 and 14 in W.P.No.1570 of 1998: Mr. G.S.Thamby For Respondent No.8 in W.P.No.4283 of 1998: Mr. R.Subramanian :COMMON ORDER
John Joseph and others, who are arrayed as accused in Crime No.917 of 1997 on the file of the Kuzhithurai Police Station, filed writ petitions in W.P.No.15595 of 1997 seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to entrust the investigation in the above crime number to some other police official and W.P.Nos.15 69, 1570 and 4283 of 1998 seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus for quashing of the charge sheet taken on file for the offences under Sections 366 read with 511, 376, 376 read with 511, 201, 302 , 312 and 506(ii) I.P.C. and for directing for impartial investigation by the C.B.I., as the investigation done by the respondent-local police was mala fide.
2. Besides these writ petitions, John Joseph filed another writ petition in W.P. No.15596 of 1997 seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the State of Tamil Nadu, the first respondent, to conduct enquiry into the conduct of the respondents 8 to 11, viz., Premkumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Branch, Nagercoil, Panneerselvam, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nagerkoil Town, Sailesh Yadav, Joint Superintendent of Police, Thuckalay and Kaliyamoorthy, Inspector of Police and other police officials in the act of torture and inhuman treatment committed on the persons arrested in Crime No. 917 of 1997 on the file of the Kuzhithurai Police Station and to prosecute them in accordance with law.
3. Seeking for the similar relief, one Nirmala and her son T.Darwin filed W.P.No.18995 of 1997 for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to take action against the respondents 4 to 7, the police officials and another for the illegal acts of torture committed by them and to punish them in accordance with law.
4. The parents of one Gilbert Raj, the deceased, filed a writ petition in W.P.No.1285 of 1998 seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to hand over the remains of Gilbert Raj to them for burial in accordance with Christian rites.
5. According to the respondents, a case was registered in Crime No.917/97 on the complaint of one Tmt.Franciscal Jeya on 5.9.1987 for the offences under Sections 366 read with 511, 376, 376 read with 511, 201, 302, 312 and 506(ii) I.P.C. against the petitioner and others. As per the complaint, the complainant�s husband Joseph Alphones was working as a Managing Trustee of the Trust called Charismatic Centre, Marthandam of which John Joseph is the actual administrator of the Trust. The complainant�s daughter Dayana was admitted in the hostel at the Charismatic Centre for education. John Joseph one day attempted to commit rape on her. Then, she escaped from the hostel and informed her parents. When John Joseph was questioned by the parents, they were threatened that they would be done away with. One Gilbert Raj aged about 18 years working in the Charismatic Centre was earlier beaten to death by John Joseph and other accused, inmates of the Centre, for having refused to do certain illegal acts. The investigation conducted on the above complaint disclosed that there was an attempt to commit rape by John Joseph (A1) on Dayana and he also forced the young boys to have sexual intercourse with one Rani (A4 ) and when the said Gilbert Raj refused to do the same, he was beaten to death. Then, the body was buried inside the Ashram.
6. The main point urged by the counsel for the petitioners for directing for the fresh investigation by the C.B.I. or some other independent agency is that the entire investigation was mala fide and since the loan amounts obtained by Charismatic Centre run by A1 from the Banks were not repaid in time, a false complaint has been filed against the petitioners at the instance of the Bank officials and thereby, they have been falsely implicated in a serious case. It is further contended that the accused were arrested on 4.9.1997 itself by the respondents police and they were taken to the different police stations and beaten brutally and confession statements were obtained from them under threat and coercion and arrest was shown only on 5.9.1997.
7. I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the records.
8. As far as the prayer for fresh investigation by C.B.I. is concerned, I am not inclined to direct for the same mainly because the investigation of this case has already been completed and charge sheet has been filed and taken on file by the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai and the case has been committed to Sessions and the same has been numbered as S.C.No.25 of 1998 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Nagercoil and as such, the case is ripe for trial.
9. Though the counsel for the petitioners would bring to the notice of this Court the various suspicious features with reference to the manner of investigation conducted by the respondent police to indicate that it was a mala fide investigation, at this stage, I am unable to hold that those features are sufficient to hold that the same is mala fide and to direct the C.B.I. to take up the case for investigation. Consequently, the request for fresh investigation is rejected.
10. However, it is open to the counsel for the petitioners to highlight those suspicious features for establishing that the investigation is mala fide during the course of trial. Similarly, this Court would not incline to quash the proceedings on the ground that it was a false case as the same has to be urged only before the trial Court. Therefore, the writ petitions in W.P.Nos.15595 of 1997 and 1569, 1570, 428 3 of 1998 seeking for directing the transfer of investigation and for quashing of the charge sheet are liable to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed.
11. As far as the prayer in W.P.No.1285 of 1998 made by the parents of Gilbert Raj, the deceased, for direction to hand over the remains of the deceased for burial is concerned, the remains can be directed to be handed over, as the Government Pleader does not object to the same and accordingly directed.
12. However, it would be appropriate to deal with the other writ petition, namely W.P. No.15596 of 1997 separately. 13. The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the State Government, the first respondent herein to initiate enquiry against the respondents 8 to 11, the police officials for having tortured the petitioner and others and to prosecute them.
14 . The contents of the said petition are as follows:- �(a) The petitioner John Joseph was the Founder Trustee of Charismatic Service Trust. He entrusted the administration of the Trust to one Joseph Alphonse, the Managing Trustee. The said Managing Trustee borrowed several lakhs from the Banks as loans and could not give back the same. (b) In the meantime, the said Joseph Alphonse disassociated himself from the Trust. He lodged a complaint through his wife Franciscal Jeya with the police implicating the petitioner and others with false allegations. On 4.9.1997 at 5.30 P.M., the respondents 8 and 9, viz., Premkumar and Panneerselvam, the Deputy Superintendents of Police along with others came to the Centre and took the petitioner, Santhana Rajan, Maria John, Gnanakkan, Sis. Wiselin Femina Rose and Sis. Sahayarani Jeyamary to the Aaralvaimozhi (Aaramboly) Police Station. There, they all were assaulted by the police. Then they were taken to the Kottar Police Station and again beaten up. Thereafter, they were taken to Armed Reserve Camp at Maravankudiyuruppu. Sis.Wiselin Femina Rose and Sis.Sahayarani Jeyamary were stripped naked and paraded before the petitioner and others and they were again beaten up. They were compelled to give false statements as if the petitioner John Joseph had illicit intimacy with them.
(c) Two boys were brought to the Armed Reserve Camp and they were also compelled to give statement that they had sexual connection with them at the instance of the petitioner.
(d) On 5.9.1997, they were taken to Thuckalay Police Station and then to Kuzhithurai Police Station. Ultimately, they were taken back to the Charismatic Service Centre and they were compelled to give a false confession statement implicating themselves by giving interview to T.V. and Press. (e) They were produced on 6.9.1997 before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai in Crime No.917 of 1997 for the offences under Sections 366 read with 511, 376, 376 read with 511, 201, 302, 312 and 506(ii) I.P.C. This case was registered as if the boy Gilbert Raj, since refused to have sexual connection with the Sisters, was beaten up to death and buried in the Ashram. Since the petitioner and others were brutally beaten up and false statements were obtained from them and some of the other witnesses, they prayed for a direction to be issued to the Government to take action against the officials, who tortured the petitioner and others.�
15. This writ petition, namely W.P.No.15596 of 1997 was admitted on 15.10.1997 . Justice E.Padmanabhan, as prayed for in the petition in W.M.P.No.2 4752 of 1997 in W.P. No.15596 of 1997, by the order dated 17.10.1997 directed a Team constituted by the Dean of the Tirunelveli Medical College to examine the five injured accused, namely John Joseph, Santhana Rajan, Maria John, Sis.Wiselin Femina Rose and Sis.Sahayarani, in the presence of the Doctor nominated by the accused persons and give treatment to them and send a report to this Court.
16. Accordingly, on 25.10.1997, the medical report was sent stating that all the accused were examined and several visible injuries were found on John Joseph and Sis.Wiselin Femina Rose.
17. On 7.11.1997, Justice E. Padmanabhan on going through the medical report and after hearing the counsel for parties thought it fit to order for an enquiry, passed an interim order in W.P.No. 15596 of 1997 directing the Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli to record the evidence of 10 persons, five accused and five witnesses, viz., Fr.John Joseph (A1), Bro.Sandana Rajan (A2), Bro.Maria John (A3), Sis.Rani @ Sahaya Rani Jaya Rani (A4), Sis.Femi @ Wiseline Femina Rose (A5), Mr.Gnanakan, Mr.Johnson, Advocate, Nagercoil, Mr.A.P.Rajan, Advocate, Thuckalay, Mr.Srikumar, Advocate, Kuzhithurai and Mr.Hasan, Proprietor, Hotel New Paradise, Marthandam and send his report giving the finding with reference to the alleged torture or excess by the police. It is further observed in the order that it is open to the respondent police officials to crossexamine those witnesses and also to produce such record or witnesses or materials in support of the defence.
18. In pursuance of the order dated 7.11.1997 of this Court, all the 10 persons were examined and cross-examined and a report of the findings along with the deposition of the 10 persons was sent on 18.12.1997 to this Court by the Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli. After receipt of the report, the parties were permitted to file their affidavits and counter-affidavits and accordingly, the additional affidavits and additional counter affidavits were filed. Counsel for the parties also were permitted to peruse the depositions and report.
19. On the basis of the depositions given before the Enquiry Officer, the learned Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli, it is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that there are prima facie materials to show that the injuries found on the body of the accused were caused by the police officers and as such, action has to be taken against the said officials.
20. On the other hand, it is contended on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner and other accused never gave any such statement regarding torture either at the time of initial remand or at any time during the period of extension of remand. Even when the Media persons questioned the arrested accused, they did not tell them about the torture. Therefore, the alleged torture and excess by the police as given in the depositions are not true and therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
21. It is relevant to recall at this juncture that when this Court passed an order on 7.11.1997 directing for recording evidence from 10 named persons on behalf of the petitioner’s side, an opportunity was given to the respondent-police officials to cross-examine the witnesses by engaging their Advocates and to produce such records or witnesses or materials in support of their defence.
22. In pursuance of this order, the witnesses 1 to 10 were examined on behalf of the petitioner’s side between 21.11.1997 and 28.11.1997. All the 1 0 witnesses mentioned above were examined in chief and cross at length. Though the opportunity was given to the respondent-police officials to produce their witnesses, they did not choose to produce any witness on their behalf.
23. However, Ex.R1 was marked on behalf of defence through one Sri Kumar, examined as 9th witness on the side of the petitioner to show that he is one of the Members of the Human Rights Protective Organisation and a resolution was passed on 27.9.1997 requesting the Government to withdraw the case which was falsely foisted against John Joseph and four others. Except this document, no other materials were placed before the enquiry Court by the respondent-police officials to establish their defence that there was no torture or excess on the part of the police, while arresting the accused. Even the Ex.R1 referred to above would not help the defence in any way and on the other hand, it supports the case of the petitioner.
24. This Court specifically ordered in the above petition directing the Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli to record the evidence of both parties and send his report of the findings on the basis of the evidence placed before him. The report of the findings along with the copies of the deposition was sent to the Court on 18.12.1997.
25. It is noticed from the report of the findings that the Enquiry Officer was unable to come to conclusion or give specific finding, on the other hand, he pointed out various contradictions between the affidavits filed in the writ petition before this Court and the deposition made before him, by way of comparison. This is beyond the the scope of enquiry. He was never asked to compare their depositions with the affidavits filed before the Court.
26. However, it is mentioned in the report that though the injuries were found on the deponents while deposing before the enquiry Court, the definite conclusion cannot be arrived at, in the absence of examination of the Team of Doctors, who examined the witnesses and issued the wound certificates on 25.10.1997 giving the details of the injuries on some of the witnesses.
27. The very purpose of directing the Principal District Judge is to find out whether these persons were illegally detained on 4.9.1997 and whether these people sustained injuries when they were in police custody till 6.9.1997. As found in the report, these injured persons were examined on 10.9.1997 itself. The certificate issued by the Doctor on 10.9.1997 also would show that there were injuries on these persons. Even though there are materials through the deposition of the injured witnesses, especially when the ladies Sis.Sahayarani and Sis. Femina Rose have made specific allegation in their depositions that two D.S.Ps. Premkumar and Panneerselvam outraged their modesty and assaulted them and caused injuries on their breasts and private parts by removing the sarees and petticoats, it is quite unfortunate that the Enquiry Officer was not able to arrive at any definite conclusion. Under those circumstances, this Court is constrained to go through the deposition copies.
28. According to the petitioner, five persons sustained injuries. Out of them, two are women. As per the medical report sent by the Team of Doctors as directed by this Court, the Doctors found various visible injuries both on Femina Rose and John Joseph on the date of examination on 25.10.1997. It is seen from the medical report that some of the injuries were found on the breast of the woman.
29. During the course of enquiry, the witness No.1 Johon Joseph, witness No.2 Santhanakrishnan, witness No.3 Maria Dass, witness No.4 Sahayarani and witness NO.5 Femina Rose were examined.
30. The deposition of four male witnesses, viz., John Joseph, Santhanakrishnan, Maria Dass and Gnanakan would give the following facts: “(a) On 4.9.1997 at 5.00 P.M., when John Joseph was sitting in his room at Charismatic Centre reading a book, the respondent Premkumar, D.S.P. and respondent Panneerselvam, another D.S.P. came with a party of Police Constables and forcibly took him and Santhanakrishnan, Sis. Femina Rose, Maria Dass and Sis. Sahayarani in the vehicle and took them to the Aaramboly Police Station. The said John Joseph was compelled to settle the amounts due to the Banks on the same day itself. He said that he had already given undertaking that he would settle the amount in October. He was compelled to execute deeds settling the properties in favour of the Banks. He said that it would not be possible for him to do so. They threatened that then they would foist a false case against them. They were taken to Kottar Police Station. There, they were beaten up. Thereafter, they were taken to Armed Reserve Camp, Maravankudiyiruppu. There, all the five accused were again beaten up. They were compelled to give a statement that one Gilbert Raj having refused to have intercourse with Sahayarani, was beaten up to death and buried in the Charismatic Centre itself. Similarly, one Rajesh was brought to the Camp and he was also threatened to give statement that he was compelled by John Joseph to have intercourse with Sis. Sahayarani and Sis.Femina Rose. When all of them refused to give such statements, Premkumar (R8) and Panneerselvam (R9) removed the sarees from Femina Rose and Sahayarani and beat them. Thereafter, both Premkumar, D.S.P.(R8) and Panneerselvam, D.S.P.(R9) tried to remove their blouse. Panneerselvam (R9) with a lathi assaulted on the breast of Sis.Femina Rose. Premkumar (R8) took another lathi and fisted on the private parts of Sis.Sahayarani. Unable to bear the horrible sight, the other accused agreed to give any statement as they like. Accordingly, their statements were recorded as dictated.
(b) Thereafter, they were taken back to Charismatic Centre. The Press was asked to come there. They took video in which they were compelled to give such statements. Thereupon, these detention and torture were continued up to 6.9.1997. In the evening, they were produced before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai for remand. Even at that time, they were threatened not to give the real facts either to the Magistrate or to others and if the torture at the hands of police is revealed, they would again be subjected to similar treatment and other girls in their family also would be brought and they would be made nude. Under those circumstances, they did not mention anything before the Magistrate, while the remand was ordered. Ultimately, they instructed their lawyers to file the writ petitions before this Court seeking for the appropriate reliefs.”
31. On going through the depositions of these witnesses, it is clear that there is a prima facie case to show that they were tortured while in police custody from 4.9.1997 to 6.9.1997 by R8 and R9.
32. One important circumstance is that one Anjala Rajan, the wife of Santhana Rajan, witness No.2 gave a telegram on 4.9.1997 to the Chairman, Human Rights Commission, New Delhi, the Chief Justice of High Court, Madras and Chief Justice of Supreme Court, New Delhi. The certified copies of the telegrams have been filed after obtaining them from the Telegraph Department. The fact that such telegrams were sent has not been disputed by the respondent-police officials in the counter. The wordings contained in the telegram are as follows:
�The police (Thuckalay A.S.P. and party) arrested six persons with two ladies from Charismatic Centre Service Trust, Marthandam (Fr.John Joseph, Br.Santhanaraj, Br.Maria Dass, Sr.Sahayamary Jayarani, Sr.Wiselin Femina Rose and Br.Gnanakan) at 5.30 p.m. 4th. But, we did not know the reason and where they kept them. So, please take action immediately.�
33. This factor as seen from the telegrams coupled with the medical report sent by the Team of Doctors headed by the Dean as directed by this Court would also clearly show that the respondent-police officials came to Charismatic Centre on 4.9.1997 and took all these persons from the Centre to the police station and they sustained injuries when they were in custody. The details of the happenings inside several police stations as given in the deposition of Sahayamary, witness No.4 and Femina Rose, witness No.5 would clearly indicate that their modesty was outraged by both Premkumar(R8) and Panneerselvam(R9) in the presence of others, that too under the very nose of one Gnanakan, who is the father of Femina Rose.
34. The gist of the deposition given by female witnesses, viz., Sahaya Rani and Femina Rose as culled out from chief and cross is as follows: (A) Sahaya Rani was suffering from a disease. She took treatment through prayers in the Charismatic Centre. After she became alright, she has been doing service by staying in the Centre for the past three years. Femina Rose also suffered from various diseases. The Doctors who treated her gave no hopes. Therefore, she was admitted in the Charismatic Centre and she was treated through prayers. Ultimately, she was cured. Therefore, she used to stay in the Centre and do service.
(B) On 4.9.1997 Thursday at about 5.30 p.m., Panneerselvam, D.S.P. and Premkumar, D.S.P. along with police pa rty and one Joseph Alphones came to the Charismatic Centre. On being pointed out by him, the police arrested Sahaya Rani, Femina Rose along with John Joseph, Santhanarajan, Maria Dass and Gnanakan, the father of Femina Rose. They were taken to Aaravaimozhi Police Station. They interrogated John Joseph. Thereafter, Panneerselvam, D.S.P. asked Sahayarani as to why one Gilbert Raj was killed. He was also asking whether the said Gilbert Raj was killed since he refused to rape Sahayarani at the compulsion of John Joseph. Sahayarani said that it was not true. He further interrogated Sahayarani as to whether she had intercourse with John Joseph. She denied the same. Then, they began to beat John Joseph and forcibly took him out from the room. He was also compelled to give a statement that he killed Gilbert Raj, since he refused to have intercourse with Sahayarani and Femina Rose. Again, Sahayarani was asked by Panneerselvam,D.S.P. regarding the same facts. Sahayarani emphatically denied stating that she was never compelled to have intercourse and Gilbert Raj was never murdered. At that time, Panneerselvam,D.S.P. beat Sahayarani. She fell down on the ground. Thereafter, Panneerselvam,D.S.P. and other Constables beat on her left thigh, right thigh and buttocks. Similarly, Santhanaraj and Maria John were also beaten up.
(C) Next day at 11.00 a.m., all these people were taken to Maravankudiyiruppu Armed Reserve Police Camp. Again interrogation continued. Then, D.S.P. Premkumar asked Sahayarani as to whether John Joseph raped her and murdered Gilbert Raj. She said that such a thing had not taken place. Then, John Joseph was first beaten up. He denied the rape and murder. At that time, Premkumar, D.S.P. came near to Sahayarani and removed her saree and petticoat and threw them at the corner of the room. Then, he also tore the blouse and pulled her breasts. Premkumar,D.S.P. took lathi and fisted on her stomach as well as on her private parts. At that time, Panneerselvam, D.S.P. similarly removed the saree of Femina Rose. After tearing the blouse, he pulled her breasts and fisted on the chest with lathi. John Joseph and Gnankan, the father of Femina Rose prostrated before Premkumar.D.S.P. and Panneerselvam, D.S.P. requesting not to outrage the modesty of the ladies. They also said that they would give any statement as they dictated. Thereafter, their statements were recorded. Then, they were compelled to give the said statement to the Press. Video also was taken by the Press Reporters.”
35. On going through the depositions of the witnesses, it is noticed that the deposition of women, namely witness No.4 Sahayarani and witness No.5 Femina Rose, who were subjected to lengthy cross-examination, are more natural and quite impressive. As indicated above, even though the Team of Doctors examined them long after the occurrence, as directed by this Court, they were able to see the injuries on the bodies of the witnesses. In the complaint given by the wife of one John Alphones registered in Crime No.917/97, the main accusation was made against John Joseph and not against witness No.4 Sahayarani and witness No.5 Femina Rose. Even then, they were also taken to police station. In such a situation, there is no necessity for these witnesses who were actually found with injuries, for implicating the police officers, who are in higher rank, namely Deputy Superintendents of Police.
36. As a matter of fact, they did not choose to make any allegation against the Superintendent of Police, though the investigation was conducted under his supervision. In fact, these witnesses would state that they were compelled to give such statement to the Superintendent of Police as well as to the Press Reporters.
37. In the said circumstances, this Court is unable to accept the contention urged on behalf of the respondents that there is no prima facie case to hold that the petitioner and others were detained in illegal custody from 4.9.1997 onwards and they were inhumanly ill-treated and modesty of the ladies was outraged in a most cruel manner.
38. As noted above, the deposition of the witness Nos.1 to 6 would clearly indicate that the police officers went to the Charismatic Centre on 4.9.1997 at 5.00 P.M. and forcibly took them to Aramboly Police Station and then to Kottar Police Station and from there, they were taken to Armed Reserve Camp and they were severely beaten up and modesty of the ladies was outraged. Even though this Court gave opportunity to the defence to examine their witnesses to establish the defence, the police officials did not get into the witness box to substantiate their defence that the accused were not arrested on 4.9.1997 but arrested only on 5.9.1997 and they were not beaten and no injuries were caused while they were in custody.
39. When the similar facts have been dealt with by the Supreme Court in ARVINDER SINGH BAGGA v. STATE OF U.P. (A.I.R.1995 S.C.117) regarding the illegal arrest and torture and fabrication of records, the Supreme Court ordered enquiry through Principal District Judge and on receipt of the report, it directed the State Government to launch prosecution against all the police officers involved in such a thing. The relevant observation is as follows: “We have carefully perused the report. We are appreciative of the good work done by the learned District Judge. He had held a thorough inquiry by examining several witnesses to arrive at the truth. In our considered opinion the report is a fair one and deserves to be accepted. It is accordingly accepted.
On a perusal of all the above, we are really pained to note that such things should happen in a country which is still governed by the rule of law. We cannot but express our strong displeasure and disapproval of the conduct of the concerned police officers. Therefore, we issue the following directions:
1. The State of Uttar Pradesh will take immediate steps to launch prosecution against all the police officers involved in this sordid affair.
2… ”
40. Similarly, when a Lecturer of a College was forcibly abducted by a Revenue Divisional Officer and tortured in his office with the help of the police officials, this Court in K.V. RAJEDNRAN v. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THARANGAMPADI POLICE STATION, PORAYAR, ETC. AND OTHERS (2001(2) L.W.(Crl.) 545 ) on the strength of the observation made by the Supreme Court in STATE OF HARYANA v. BHAJAN LAL (1992 Crl.L.J.527) directed the Special Branch C.I.D. to register F.I.R. against the said R.D.O. for various offences regarding the torture and illegal custody and file a final report in the Court concerned.
41. It is clear from the observation made by this Court as well as the Supreme Court that if a police officer transgresses the circumscribed limits and illegally exercises his investigatory powers in breach of any statutory provision causing serious prejudice to the personal liberty of a citizen, then the Court on being approached by the person aggrieved shall consider the nature and extent of the breach of the police officer concerned and pass appropriate orders as may be called for without leaving the citizen to the mercy of police echelons, since human dignity is a dear value of our Constitution.
42. If this sort of inhuman and ill-treatment in the name of interrogation by the police officers, that too at the D.S.P. level is allowed to go on, then there is no protection even to the persons who are innocent. When these atrocities were brought to the notice of this Court, certainly the powers of this Court have got to be exercised to give appropriate orders so that the members of the Law Enforcing Agency will know their limit. The people also would feel and hope that they would be protected as per the rights guaranteed under the Constitution by arms of law through the appropriate orders passed by this Court by invoking the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution.
43. The role played by the police officers in this case would make this Court to think that these officials have behaved like barbarians without giving any respect to the human dignity, that too with the ladies Sahaya Rani and Femina Rose who are regarded as sisters. As a matter of fact, these people were compelled to give statements to Press persons who took video. This Court earlier dealt with the bail application by some of the accused in this case and had an occasion to see the said video in order to show whether those statements were obtained by threat or coercion. On seeing the Video, this Court was unable to come to the conclusion that there was any threat since only some of the portions of the statements were shown to this Court. This Court is unable to understand as to why the Press Reporters were allowed to take Video. Admittedly, the Video was not taken by the Law Enforcing Agency. Strangely, the Superintendent of Police has filed an affidavit before this Court in this writ petition stating that the Video was taken by the Press Persons in spite of the objection raised by the police. This statement of Superintendent of Police cannot be true. When the objection was raised by the police, how the Press Reporters could record statement of these injured persons through Video? In the bail application, this Court was requested by the Public Prosecutor to witness the Video. If such an objection was raised by the police, there was no necessity to keep that Video with them. These are all would show that the police agency wanted to mislead the Court by giving the false particulars by showing the Video. It is to be further stated that when the bail application was dealt with by this Court, the deposition given by the witness Nos.1 to 10 both in chief and cross were not available.
44. Under those circumstances, the earlier observation made by this Court in the bail application would not stand in the way of this Court to give a finding with regard to the illegal custody and inhuman torture which the five persons were subjected to.
45. In view of the above discussion, it would be appropriate to direct the first respondent, namely State of Tamil Nadu to launch prosecution through C.B.C.I.D. against Premkumar, former D.S.P., Special Branch, Nagercoil and Panneerselvam, former D.S.P. of Nagercoil Town, who were involved in the offences relating to the illegal custody of the injured persons and torture committed on them, especially on women, viz., witness No.4 Sahayarani and witness No.5 Femina Rose. On passing suitable orders by the State Government in pursuance of this order, the C.B.C.I.D. shall record the statement of Femina Rose who is one of the injured and register F. I.R. against Premkumar and Panneerselvam, the D.S.Ps. for the appropriate offences and after recording the statements of the other injured persons and other witnesses who were examined before the Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli and the statements of all the Doctors concerned and any other witnesses to be produced and after collecting other materials, if any, launch prosecution against the two named police officials before the appropriate Court.
46. The C.B.C.I.D. is directed to comply with the order of this Court and file the final report in the light of the deposition given by the witnesses 1 to 10 before the Principal District Judge and other witnesses for the appropriate offences against the police officials concerned within three months from the date of receipt of this order. On entertaining the said final report launching prosecution against the police officials concerned, the Court concerned would go on with the proceedings in accordance with law, uninfluenced by any of the observations made in this order.
47. In the meantime, the Sessions Court in S.C.No.25 of 1998 may frame appropriate charges against the accused concerned and go on with the trial. Since the prosecution, which is to be launched against the police officers with reference to the torture on the accused in S.C.No.25 of 1998, is in relation to some other transaction, there is no bar for the trial Court to go on with the trial in S.C.No.25 of 1998 and finish the same as expeditiously as possible.
48. To sum up: (i)The first respondent, namely, the State of Tamil Nadu is directed to launch prosecution through C.B.C.I.D. against Premkumar, former D.S.P., Special Branch, Nagercoil and Panneerselvam, former D.S.P. of Nagercoil Town, who were involved i he offences relating to the illegal custody of the injured persons and torture committed on them, especially on women, viz., witness No.4 Sahaya Rani and witness No.5 Femina Rose.
(ii) On passing suitable orders by the State Government, the C.B.C.I.D. shall record the statement of the injured Femina Rose and register F.I.R. against Premkumar and Panneerselvam, the D.S.Ps. for the appropriate offences and shall record the statements of the other injured persons and other witnesses examined before the Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli, the Team of Doctors and any other witnesses to be produced and collect other materials, if any, and launch prosecution against the two named police officials by filing the final report before the appropriate Court within three months from the date of receipt of this order. On entertaining the said final report launching prosecution against the police officials concerned, the Court concerned would go on with the proceedings in accordance with law, uninfluenced by any of the observations made in this order. (iii) The observations in this order would not affect the merits of the prosecution in S.C.No.25 of 1998. The trial Court can go on with the trial uninfluenced by any of the observations made by this Court in this order. Since the offences in S.C.No.25 of 1998 would relate to different transaction, the trial Court need not wait till the prosecution is launched against R8 and R9, the police officials and go on with the trial in S.C.No.25 of 1998 and finish the same as expeditiously as possible.
49. With the above directions, W.P.No.15596 of 1997 is disposed of. Consequently, no separate order is necessary in W.P.No.18995 of 1997. As stated above, W.P.Nos.15595 of 1997 and 1569, 1570, 4283 of 1998 are dismissed and W.P.No.1285 of 1998 is allowed. All the connected W.M.Ps. are closed. Index: Yes
Internet: Yes
mam
To
1. State of Tamil Nadu
rep. by Secretary to Govt.,
Home Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-9.
2. Director General of Police,
Government Estate,
Chennai-2.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
4. Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Special Branch,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
5. The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Nagercoil Town,
Kanyakumari District.
6. Joint Superintendent of Police,
Thuckalay,
Kanyakumari District.
7. Inspector of Police,
Kuzhithurai,
Kanyakumari District.
8. The Government Pleader, High Court, Madras.
9. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
9:20 முப இல் செப்ரெம்பர் 30, 2010 |
There is no difference between John Joseph and these group, as their main motive has been to have sex, that too, multiple sex.
Definitely, they have been indulged in manufgacturing blue films, that is why such CDs / DVDs have been in circulation in the market.
10:59 முப இல் ஒக்ரோபர் 1, 2010 |
These “fuckers” (I am sorry to use such expression) have been bent upon such activities and they are to be checked thoroughly by pasychologists, as day by day their sex-crimes have been increasing.
They should be punished severely, as other wise, after getting 3/5/7 years imprisonment, again indulge in the same acticties, as they have become animals anmd nor humnabeings.
11:55 முப இல் ஒக்ரோபர் 12, 2010 |
Yesterday, in some TV program, Cine actress Lakshmi was discussing about stealing, abducting and exporting of babies / children under the guise of adoption through one Malaysian / Singapore Christian agency.
Several parents have been complaining about their missing babies / children, but later, they could find out that they are in USA or European countries.
In all cases, the Christian missionaries are only involved in such kidnapping and abduction.
8:17 முப இல் ஒக்ரோபர் 14, 2010 |
The meaning of convent, abbey, seminary, nunnery etc., might be known to the present world.
11:10 முப இல் ஒக்ரோபர் 13, 2010 |
முதலில் சபலமில்லாத வயதான ஆண்கள்தாம், இப்பணியில் நியமிக்கப் படவேண்டும்.
இரவ்ய் நேரத்தில் ஆண்களை அனுமதிக்கக் கூடாது.
பெண்கள் தாம் நிர்வாகிகலாக, அதிகாரிகளாக, பாதுகாவலர்களாக இருக்க வேண்டும்.
இப்பெண்கள் சிரத்தையுடனும், கண்டிப்பாகவும் இருக்க வேண்டும். எஅந்த காரணத்திற்கும், ஆண்களுடன் ஒத்துப் போகும் வகையாக இருக்கக் கூடாது.
ஊட்டி முதல், உள்ளூர் வரை பெண்களும் ஒத்துழைப்புத் தருவதினால்தான், பிஷப்புகள் முதல் பாஸ்டர் வரை கன்னிமார்களை, கன்னியாஸ்தீரிகளை மற்ற பெண்களை தங்களுக்கு காம இச்சையைப் பூர்த்தி செய்யும் மாதர்களக அவர்கள் நினைத்துக் கொள்கிறார்கள். அதுமட்டுமல்லாது, ஒருவர் அவ்வாறு செய்யும் போது, மற்றவர்களுக்கும் சபலம் வருகின்றது. எல்லோருமே ஒத்துழைத்துப் போகும் போது, விபச்சார விடுதி போலவே ஆகிவிடுகிறது.
6:46 முப இல் பிப்ரவரி 22, 2011 |
[…] https://christianityindia.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%A3%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BF%E0%A… […]
2:43 பிப இல் மார்ச் 25, 2012 |
[…] [21] https://christianityindia.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%A3%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BF%E0%A… […]
10:59 முப இல் மார்ச் 3, 2013 |
[…] [19]https://christianityindia.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%A3%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BF%E0%A… […]
12:58 பிப இல் ஏப்ரல் 21, 2013 |
[…] [12] https://christianityindia.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%A3%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BF%E0%A… […]