‘Why no names in FIR on RK Nagar by-poll case’

A division bench comprising Justice M Sathyanarayanan and Justice M Sundar, on perusing the Income Tax department report based on which the EC had directed the police to file an FIR and sought the police diary of Abhiramapuram which filed the FIR, asked the Advocate General (AG) as to why the column meant for the names in the FIR has been left blank when the Income Tax report clearly mentions three names. To this, the AG submitted that the initial reports available with the police did not contain any names and hence the column in the FIR was left blank. Refusing to accept the contention, the bench pointed out that even the report filed by the Income Tax department had mentioned many names with their mobile phone numbers. 

However, even as the AG submitted that the documenIts that contained the names were mere paper slips and that the investigation was in progress to ascertain the genuineness of the slips seized at the time of the I-T raid, the bench said, “We are not commenting on the investigation. We just wanted to know why the names mentioned in the report were not reflected in the  accused column.” 

The bench then directed the High Court registry to keep all the reports in a sealed cover and issued notice to all the respondents, including the Chief Electoral Officer, Retuning Officer of RK Nagar constituency as well as the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, to file their replies by July 14. 

The case pertains to a plea to register an FIR against Chief Minister Edappadi K Palanisamy, TTV Dinakaran and five others for allegedly distributing cash to voters in the R K Nagar by-poll. During the previous hearing, with the counsel for the EC submitting that an FIR had been filed way back in April, the bench had sought the 34-page Income Tax report based on which the EC had directed the police to file an FIR and the police diary pertaining to the case.   

There seems to be no end to the delay in releasing the admission list for Post Graduate medical courses in the state. The Madras High Court on acceding to the state’s request for more time to reconfigure the merit list as they have moved the Supreme Court against it, adjourned the case to June 28.

The division bench comprising Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice R Suresh Kumar had on June 16, 2017, directed the Selection Committee of the Post-Graduate Degree/Diploma Medical Courses to reconfigure the merit list published on May 7, 2017, within three days. They had cited lack of criteria in fixing rural PHCs and defining difficult and hilly areas. But, seeking more time to implement its order, the state government on Friday approached the bench submitting that a Special Leave Petition (SLP) has been filed before the Supreme Court challenging the order to reconfigure the list. The bench, while observing that based on the urgency in the matter it had granted three days to redo the list, said how can more time be granted as the admissions were already running beyond the schedule. However, Advocate General R Muthukumaraswamy told the bench that since the SLP filed has been numbered, the government will make a special mention before the Supreme Court on Tuesday seeking for an urgent hearing of the case. He also told the court that he would submit the outcome of the SLP following which the bench adjourned the case.