CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has questioned the police action of picking up MIDS associate professor and economist A Kalaiyarasan from his residence at dawn over a social media post made through a fake account bearing his photograph.

Justice N Ramesh made these observations while hearing an anticipatory bail petition filed by DMK Councillor D Sudha before the Madras High Court.

The judge said these were not merely theoretical concerns, as events of the past few days had demonstrated them. He referred to the widely reported incident involving A Kalaiyarasan, an associate professor at the Madras Institute of Development Studies (MIDS), who had served various bodies of the Union and State governments.

Kalaiyarasan was taken from his residence at around 5 am by policemen in plain clothes without being shown any complaint, authorisation or first information report. The action was taken over an abusive social media comment against a ruling party legislator, which was found within hours to have been posted through a fake account misusing his photograph.

He was released on the same day, and the Chief Minister received him at the Secretariat, while a Minister publicly acknowledged the lapse. The judge clarified that the incident was not before him and that he was not making any findings on it, but referred to it to highlight two important lessons.

First, the judge said that the gesture shown at the end did not answer the questions raised by the manner in which the incident began: on what verification were plainclothes police personnel sent to a citizen’s doorstep at dawn over a social media comment, and what action had been taken against those responsible? An apology, however high its source, did not amount to accountability, and a remedy that depended on the Chief Minister’s personal intervention was not a remedy at all.

Secondly, the judge observed that the economist’s prominence had secured his release within hours and an audience with the Chief Minister at the Secretariat. However, an ordinary citizen without access to power, taken away at dawn on the basis of the same mistaken complaint, would have faced police custody, remand and a prolonged trial before anyone even questioned whether the social media account belonged to him.

The judge further observed that the true measure of a police force was not how it treated eminent personalities when the press was watching, but how it treated ordinary citizens when nobody was watching. He said the handling of political speech, including the present case, had to be judged against this standard.