Chennai-Salem expressway: public interest litigation alleges police high-handedness

The first bench comprising acting Chief Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh and Justice S S Sundar, before whom the plea came on Friday, ordered notice to the State returnable in four weeks.

In his plea, advocate P Rathinam contended that the 277 km project, with an estimated project cost of Rs 10,000 crore, covers five districts – Salem, Dharmapuri, Krishnagiri, Tiruvannamalai and Kancheepuram. It would require 7,500 hectares of agricultural lands, 500 hectares of forest lands and seven rivers for the scheme. But the highhanded way the land survey has been progressing has raised grave concern, the petitioner said.

Also, listing out several allegations wherein farmers and their family members were dragged to police stations, abused, attacked, termed as anti-nationals, false cases foisted, remanded in custody and attacked, he said the judicial magistrates have also been mechanically remanding these persons.

In one such case, A Marimuthu (30) of Salem was arrested at 2.30 am from his residence by Annathanapatty police on June 9. But the FIR claimed that he was arrested at Seelanayakkanpatty while conspiring with two others to plant a bomb on that bridge in a bid to act against the State and Centre. 

Another instance that formed part of the affidavit was about a person who was slapped so hard by a police officer that the he lost hearing capacity on that ear.

Quoting media reports and the observation of a division bench disapproving the use of police force against land owners, the petitioner said there was a dire need for a proper study and assessment of the available alternative instead of the proposed eight-lane road. Rathinam added that there were three roads between Chennai and Salem, but no explanation from the governments for not utilising the available roads for expansion. Similarly, no effort was made to utilise the railroads and for its expansion, which would require less expenditure and save agricultural and forest lands.

Besides seeking compensation for those illegally arrested and harassed, the petitioner also sought the constitution of an expert body consisting of environmental scientist and other experts in the forest maintenance to study the positive and negative impact of the project and suggest alternative options that can minimise its negative impact.