‘Sensitise public against honour killings’

The first bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M Sundar, said “We are conscious of the fact that there has to be a social change in the thinking process, but the sensitivity of the police would also make the society more aware and law abiding on issues like these.” It also noted that “The fact that parents and immediate relatives are often responsible for what is happening is the reflection of the society as it moves towards more modern industrialised state. The police are also a part of the same society and thus, sensitisation plays a very important role.” 

The bench on being told that it’s the Law Ministry and not the Home Ministry which is examining the 242nd report of the law commission to bring about a standalone legislation to combat honour killing, impleaded the Ministry of Law and Justice into the case and expressed hope that the legislation would be brought about at the earliest. The PIL moved by Varaagi had sought for a direction to the National Commission for Scheduled Tribe, New Delhi and by the Members of TN  Legislative Assembly to bring new legislation against honour killings. 

The bench also directed the police to circulate the Supreme Court direction that in the event of such honour killing happening, apart from instituting criminal proceeding against those responsible for such atrocities, the state is directed to immediately suspend the District Magistrate/Collector and SSP/SPs of the district as well as other officials concerned and charge-sheet them. The order had also sought to proceed against them departmentally if they had failed to prevent such incidents.

The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu state DGP to be present in the court on January 9, if he failed to respond to the suo motu proceedings initiated by it on women police inspectors not being posted in Civil Supplies Criminal Investigation Department (CS-CID). When the matter came up on Thursday before the first bench, the Additional Advocate General sought for more time to file a counter.  The bench then posted the matter to January 9, after holding that “If the counter is not filed by then, the DGP shall remain present in the Court.” 

The first bench headed by the Chief Justice on taking serious note of women police inspectors not being posted in CS-CID has on November 21, initiated suo motu proceedings. The AAG had submitted then that women officers would not be in a position to travel and conduct raids at odd hours. The bench observed, “We find the aforesaid approach completely unacceptable in the current day situation, where there is permanent commission for women even in Armed Forces.” It also directed the state to produce its GO dated October 19, 2005, to verify its validity in law, apparently seeking to debar women officers.

The Madras High Court has dismissed a plea seeking to keep the demonetisation notification in abeyance until an alternative and adequate arrangements for free flow of cash in all denominations is made possible. First bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M Sundar held that “The petitioner has referred to the implementation of the demonetisation policy, which is alleged to have caused loss of life and disruption of economic livelihood. Those would be matters of implementation rather than challenge to the policy and Supreme Court is already seized of that issue.” Suchitra Vijayan, barrister in law, had contended that demonetisation has purged liquidity from a predominantly cash-only economy that provides livelihood to half the population. She had also submitted that the Government’s policy of demonetisation has neither considered the means and ends; nor the calculus of cost and benefits.