Verdict in DGP extension case reserved

Petitioner Kadiresan, ITUC functionary from Madurai, had stated that the state had recently given two years extension for TK Rajendran as DGP despite the fact that he was named in gutka case by Income Tax (IT) Department. Though there were many efficient police officers, they were ignored and Rajendran had been preferred. 

As the gutka case is under investigation, the presence of Rajendran as DGP would hamper the probe. So, the court should strike down the extenstion order given to Rajendran, prayed the petitioner. 

Earlier, the court had directed the chief secretary, the DVAC and the I-T Department to file all documents related to the appointment of the DGP and the progress in the gukta case. After all the departments submitted their documents in sealed covers, the case was heard on Monday. 

The government pleader argued that during a raid on one of the gutka companies, a diary was seized and there was a mention in it that Rs 17 lakh was given to Rajendran. But, it had no further details and it cannot be confirmed that the Rajendran mentioned in the diary was TK Rajendran, who was then the Commissioner of Chennai. The name of the manager of the gutka company too was Rajendran and so was the name of one of the brokers.

The noting in the diary could not be taken as proof and charges cannot be pressed against the DGP, the pleader said and requested the court to dismiss the petiton.

However, the petitioner’s counsel argued that the I-T Department  in their investigation had confirmed that it was the DGP Rajendran and then only forwarded the charges to the chief secretary. Following heated arguments, Judges KK Sasidharan and GR Swaminathan reserved the final orders in the case without mentioning any date.