MADURAI ADHEENA PEADATHIPATHI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A telegram purported to have been sent by the Sri Madurai Adheena Peedathiapthi, addressed to the Honourable the Chief Justice of this High Court was admitted as a writ petition and Rule Nisi was issued by the First Bench of this Court consisting of the Honourbale the Chief Justice and Venkataswami,j. on 27-10-1983. Notice was issued to the learned Public Prosecutor and a counter was directed to be filed within two weeks and this petition was ordered to be posted before this Bench. Accordingly it came before us on 8-11-1983 on which date we directed notice to be sent to the Maduraj Adheena Peedathipathi, m\Madurai, informing the Adheenam that the matterstood posted to 17-11-83 for further proceddings and that if the Adheenam desired the Adheenam could appear dither in person or through lawyer. During the pendency of this writ petition. Mr.s.n Amarnath an advocate of this bar has filed W.M.P 18175 of 1983 requesting this Court to implead him as a party respondent in the writ petition. Similary done N.R.Ramakrihnan has filed W.M.P No.16519 of 1983 requesting the court to impled him a respondent in the writ petition

(2.) The telegram admittedly sent by the Madurai Adheenam reads thus: Honourable Chief Justice High Court, Madras. The Genocide in Sri Lanka continues unendurably and Madurai Adheenam warns the Tamils to stand guard against it despite the Sinhalese violence. Our Government at instigation of R.M. Veerappan has started giving troubles to us instead of offering co-operation for the sake of Tamils for the second time again. A false charge is attempted at Trichi, obtaining order from Trich First class magistrate deliberately while we address a public meeting. Two Airguns and an Air Pistol and with office files were removed after a search conducted by police in our room on 23rd October under (section) 505 I.P.C Section Arms Act. Tamil Nadu has grown very tired of Veerappan's misrule. His harmful and ruthless manners should be brought to the notice of the public so that everyone could recognize his vices thereby dismissing him from the Ministry. Madurai Adheenam Peedathipathi,Madurai;

(3.) In compliance with the directions of the First Bench, the Inspector of Police Crime Bench, C.I.D., on behalf of the respondent herein, has filed a counter- affidavit stating that a case came to be registered on 19-10-1983.against Sri la Sri Arunagirinathar Sri Gnansambanda Desika Paramchary Swamigal Adheenam Madurai as first accused and against his security man, as the second accused by the Sub-Inspector of Police District Crime Branch, Trichirapalli, in Crime No.10/83, of his station, based on a perusal of the short hand report of the speech of the Madathipathi made on 17-10-1983 under S. 505(b) I.P.C since the Madathipathi, during the course of his speech had brandished a revolver of German make, for the possession of which he was as found on verification, not possessed of any license. On the strength of a search warrant obtained from the learned judicial First Class Magistrate, No I, Tricuhirapalli his Madam and his ancestral house and the house of one Rajomani Ammal were searched after observing all the statutory formalities and the search resulted in the recovery of three weapons and some documents from the Madam where the Madathipathi was residing. These weapons and the documents were seized under a search list, copy of which was served on the Madathipathi. It is further stated that the seized weapons have been sent to the Ballistic Expert for opinion and that the Inspector. Crime Branch, C.I. D. is investigating this case. Further, the Inspector in his counter has submitted that it is not correct to say that the Minister for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments was camping at Tiruchi and instigating the police to foist a case against the Madathipathi ....that the allegations that the Honourable Minister for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments had instigated the police to foist a case against the Madathipathi is totally unfounded and unwarranted" (vide paras 5 and 6 of the counter). It is further submitted that this writ petition is not maintainable in law.