Southern States
-
Tamil Nadu
Karuppan's statement
The president of the Madras High Court Advocates Association, R. Karuppan, writes:
``I wish to state that the warrant did not emanate from any contempt case filed by the Supreme Court. The warrant emanates pursuant to a complaint given by the Assistant Registrar of the Supreme Court against the president of the Madras High Court Advocates Association. My name has no significance except when it is associated with the name of the office of the association which comprises 44,000 lawyers practising throughout the state of Tamilnadu and Pondicherry.
There was no contempt action initiated against me by the Supreme Court. If it was a contempt action initiated by the Supreme Court, it can only be tried by a bench of the Supreme Court is everybody's knowledge.
With regard to such a case how could a non-bailable warrant have been suppressed, the circumstances under which exemption from appearance have been granted and recalled within minutes had not been referred. That apart, while the said warrant which remains unexecuted, or recalled, how could a fresh warrant dated 3-01-02 be issued is not stated. The warrant not containing the mandatory particulars is not mentioned. Further, even the case number not being indicated in the warrant is not mentioned. The warrant containing vital portions being struck off without being duly filled in and authenticated is not mentioned.
However you have stated that my failure to appear before the court on January 10 as the cause of the issue of the warrant. If that be true how could the warrant be issued on January 3.
The Magistrate returning the warrant as defective for not having the enclosure as required by Section 78(1) of the CPC is also not mentioned. The glaring defects are stated as `some technical defect'. Furthermore it was quite strange to note that the Commissioner has exercised his magisterial powers under Section 81 is shocking.
It is common knowledge that no person arrested can be held in custody without being produced before the earliest possible time before the nearest Judicial Magistrate. Mr Vijay Kumar, the Commissioner of Police, exercising extra constitutional power and arrogating himself as even superior to that of the Chief Judicial Magistrate also should have been reported.
The very fact that I was almost granted bail by the Sessions Judge and later by the High Court demonstrates the grave infirmities found in the warrant.''
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Southern States
|
