CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has granted one week's time to the Government of Tamil Nadu to clarify whether a compensation of Rs 3 lakh had been paid to a mother who lost her son, pursuant to the orders issued by the Tamil Nadu State Human Rights Commission in a case relating to alleged human rights violations.
The case pertains to the death of Radhakrishnan, the son of Revathi, a resident of Raja Annamalaipuram in Chennai. On August 4, 2018, Radhakrishnan was returning home on a two-wheeler belonging to his friend when he was intercepted by traffic police personnel on the Adyar Bridge for a vehicle check.
During the inspection, the traffic police allegedly demanded the vehicle documents and seized the ignition key of the vehicle. Following this, Radhakrishnan reportedly threatened to jump into the Adyar River and, at one stage, jumped into the river.
Suresh, who had accompanied Radhakrishnan, allegedly requested the police personnel to rescue him. However, the Fire and Rescue Services personnel, who were called to the spot about 45 minutes later, eventually retrieved Radhakrishnan's body from the river.
Alleging that her son's death was the result of police excesses, L.Revathi filed a petition before the Tamil Nadu State Human Rights Commission seeking compensation of Rs 20 lakh and disciplinary action against the police personnel concerned.
After considering the complaint, the Commission, in January 2025, directed the State government to pay a compensation of Ra 3 lakh to Revathi and also recommended action against the police officials involved.
Subsequently, the State government issued a Government Order in February 2025 regarding the payment of compensation and action against the police personnel. However, alleging that the order had not been implemented, Revathi approached the Madras High Court seeking appropriate directions.
When the matter came up for hearing before a Bench comprising Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, directed the State government to inform the court whether the Government Order issued in February last year had been implemented and adjourned the matter to next week.