Madras High Court
Ravi vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 23 November, 2021
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.11.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
Ravi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its
Chief Secretary to Government,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Ammapet Police Station,
Thiruvarur District.
3.The Designated Court,
Thiruchirapalli,
Tirchy District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the First respondent to
consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.10.2012 by
constituting a Review Committee to Review the case in C.C.No.43 of 1995
on the file of the Designated Court, Thiruchirapally by in accordance with
law.
1/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sankarasubbu
For Respondents : Mr.C.Selvaraj
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the
respondent to consider representation of the petitioner dated 19.10.2012 by
constituting a Review Committee to Review the case in C.C.No.43 of 1995
on the file of the Designated Court, Thiruchirapally.
2. The petitioner states that he was falsely implicated into offence
under Section 3(3) of TADA Act read with 120 B and 302 of I.P.C. and 4
of Explosives Substances Act. The petitioner plead innocence of the
allegations in the case of the year 1994 in Crime No.429 of 1994. The case
is pending on the file of the Designated Court, Thrichirappalli, in Criminal
Case No.43 of 1995. The petitioner was enlarged on bail and faced trial.
3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf
of the respondents brought to the notice of this Court that the trail has
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
already been completed and the matter is posted for judgment.
4. The petitioner states that the TADA Act was dead during 1995
and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India directed to constitute a Review
Committee under the Chairmanship of the 1st respondent. However, no
Review Committee was constituted as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India and under those circumstances, the petitioner approached this
Court with a prayer to direct the 1st respondent to consider the
representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 19.10.2012 for
constitution of a Review Committee to review the case in Criminal Case
No.43 of 1995.
5. Question arises, whether the Review Committee was constituted
and the case of the petitioner was reviewed by the competent committee
pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India or not. The
Apex Court of India in the case of Kartar Singh Vs State of Punjab
reported in 1994 SSC(3) 569, laid down that, in order to ensure higher level
of scrutiny and applicability of TADA Act, there must be a Screening
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
Committee or a Review Committee. Accordingly, the Central Government
has to constitute a Review Committee, so also the State Government at the
State level by the respective States consisting of Chief Secretary, Home
Secretary, Law Secretary, Director General of Police, (Law and Order) and
other officials as the respective Government may think it fit to review the
action of the enforcing authorities under the Act and screen the case
registered under the provisions of the Act and decide the further course of
action in every matter and so on.
6. It is an admitted fact that there is no provision under the TADA
Act for constitution of Review Committee or to review the case filed under
the provisions of the TADA Act. In the absence of any provisions under the
TADA Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the Central Government
and respective State Governments to constitute a Review Committee for the
purpose of reviewing the cases registered under the provisions of the TADA
Act for the limited purposes, to ascertain the genuinity and correctness of
the cases.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this
Court with reference to the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India that on many occasions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
come across cases, wherein the prosecution unjustifiably invokes the
provisions of the TADA Act with an oblique motive of depriving the
accused persons from getting bail and in some occasions when the courts
are inclined to grant bail in cases registered under ordinary criminal law, the
investigating officers in order to circumvent the authority of the courts
invoke the provisions of the TADA Act.
8. In view of the fact that the competent authorities prosecuted
unjustifiably by invoking the provisions of the TADA Act, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court directed the Central Government and the respective State
Government to constitute a Review Committee to screen the case registered
under the provisions of the TADA Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
9. In this context, the learned Additional Government Pleader
furnished a copy of the minutes of the Review Meeting on TADA for the
quarter ending 30.06.2012, 30.09.2012, 31.12.2012, 31.03.2013 held at
5:00PM on 26.06.2013 in the chamber of Chief Secretary to Government of
Tamil Nadu. The meeting was chaired by the Chief Secretary to
Government. The Principal Secretary, Home Prohibition and Excise
Department, The Secretary to Government, Law Department, Director
General Police (Law and Order), Additional Director General of Police and
Inspector General of Police, Intelligence (Internal Security), 'Q' Branch
CID, were present in the Review Meeting conducted on 26.06.2013. The
minutes of the Review Committee reveals that the representation of the
accused/ petitioner was discussed in the meeting elaborately and the
Committee made an observations as follows:
“a) On 25.05.1994, S.I. And party of Ammapettai PS,
on patrol duty intercepted a white Ambassador car No.TML
996. One of the occupants viz., Ravi @ Auto Ravi ran away in
dark. When police took Rajan (Driver) and Kannan (LTTE
cadre) to the Police station, they exploded hand grenades and
managed to escape under cover of darkness. Due to explosion,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
one Inspector, one SI, a constable and 4 members of public
sustained injuries and one of the public succumbed to the
injuries later.
b) In this connection, a case in Ammapettai PS Cr No.
429/94 u/s.120(B), 302, 307, 114 IPC, 3 and 5 of Explosive
Substances Act, 1908, Sec.25 (1-A) of Arms Act, 1959, Sec 3
r/w 6 of Indian Wireless Telegraphic Act, 1933, Sec. 3, 4, 5 of
TADA Act, 1987 was registered.
c) The above case, reported on 25.5.1994, was
charged on 16.11.1994 vide CC NO.43/95 on the file of
Designated Court, Tirchy.
d) There are 19 accused in total. Out of the 19
accused, accused Kannan (LTTE cadre) and V.P.Natesan have
expired. The remaining 17 accused are attending the court.
e)Out of 199 witnesses cited in the Charge Sheet, 146
witnesses have been examined, 225 exhibits produced and 87
material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution. The
examination of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C was
completed on 29.12.2003 and those of witnesses, on 19.9.2005.
Both side arguments were completed on 25.1.2006. Thereafter,
the case was posted for judgment on 24.2.2006. Subsequently,
owing to the transfer of Judges, the judgment was delayed.
After the joining of the present presiding judge, the case was
posted for fresh argument on 17.7.2012. Subsequently, the case
got adjourned several times owing to the requests made by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
defense and it was posted for fresh argument on 1.11.2012
finally. The prosecution completed their argument on that date.
f) Now, the petitioner filed the above Writ Petition No.
29590/2012 for directing the first respondent (The Chief
Secretary to Government) to consider his representation dated
19.10.2012 by constituting a Review Committee to review the
case in CC No.43 of 1995 on the file of the Designated Court,
Tirchy. An interim stay has been granted by the Hon'ble High
Court against the proceedings before the Designated Court,
Tirchy.
g) In this case, it is found that the provisions of TADA
Act have been invoked properly.”
10. Based on the above facts, the Committee decided to reject the
claim of the accused Ravi @ Auto Ravi/writ petitioner, on the ground that
the provisions of the TADA Act have been invoked in his case properly and
the case before the Designated Court, Tirchy has to proceed further.
11. The learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended
that the Fundamental Principles of Criminal Jurisprudence requires fairness
in the Criminal prosecution. The Constitution of Review Committee has to
ensure that the prosecution initiated are screened by the high level
committee to avoid unjustifiable actions by the Subordinate officials.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
12. Thus, the accused himself must be heard by the Review
Committee. In the present case, the Review Committee has not given such
an opportunity to the writ petitioner and therefore, a direction is to be issued
for Constitution of a Review Committee by considering the representation
of the writ petitioner.
13. It is contented that an opportunity of hearing must be provided
to the petitioner. In the present case, the Review Committee convened a
Review meeting on 26.06.2013 and the representations submitted by the
writ petitioner/accused was considered and the Committee elaborately
considered the objections and formed an opinion that the case under the
TADA Act was filed properly and therefore, it must be proceeded before the
Designated Court at Thiruchirapalli.
14. This Court has to consider, whether the Review Committee was
constituted in accordance with the directives of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India and whether the petitioner is entitled to represent his case in person
or through his counsel before the Review Committee. As rightly pointed out
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
by the writ petitioner, the Fundamental Principles requires fairness in
criminal prosecution. Every accused is entitled for an opportunity of
defending his case. The settled principles in this regard is not in dispute.
However, the scope of review by the Review Committee constituted
pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India is to be
considered by this Court.
15. Admittedly, there is no provisions under the TADA Act for
constituting a Review Committee or regular hearing of the case or
objections or representations filed by the accused persons. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India found that in many cases prosecutions are done
unjustifiably by invoking the provisions of the TADA Act. Under those
circumstances, the Apex Court of India directed the Central Government
and respective State Governments to constitute higher level committee to
screen the cases registered under the provisions of the TADA Act and
decide the further course of action.
16. Thus, the powers of Review Committee is to be exercised with
reference to the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
and it is not as Statutory committee constituted under the provisions of the
Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in clear terms held that “ to
review the action of enforcing authorities under the Act and screen the
cases registered under the provisions of the Act and decide the further
course of action in every matter and so on.”
17. The very purpose of such direction is to ensure that the
administrative actions / prosecution done by the authorities are based on
certain materials and warranting an action under the TADA Act. Thus, it is
an administrative review, directed to be conducted by the high level Review
Committee and such a Committee need not conduct any personal enquiry in
respect of the representation/objections submitted by the accused person. It
is not a Review Committee constituted for the purpose of hearing of the
accused person for the purpose of providing redressal. Contrarily, this
Review Committee is constituted to screen the administrative actions while
enforcing the provisions of the Act by the authorities and such screening is
to be made based on the records available, facts and circumstances made
available through the case files, and considering the objections by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
accused if any.
18. Thus, the powers of the Review Committee is undoubtedly
limited. The Review Committee need not conduct an enquiry by hearing all
the parties and made a finding for the purpose of granting exoneration or
otherwise. The powers of the Review Committee is to ensure, whether the
prosecution initiated is in consonance with the provisions of the Act and the
particular facts and circumstances of the case, warrant a prosecution under
the provisions of the TADA Act or not. Thus, the powers of the Review
Committee is to be exercised with reference to the context, in which, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India referred.
19. Therefore, the Review Committee on scrutinizing the files,
forms an opinion that the case was unjustifiably filed by the prosecuting
agency, then they can revert back the cases before the regular Court. If there
is justification in prosecuting a person under the TADA Act, then the
Review Committee shall allow the case to go on before the Designated
Court constituted under the TADA Act. This being the nature of the
administrative review to be conducted by the Review Committee constituted
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, question
of conducting an enquiry by providing personal hearing may not be required
and such personal hearing of the accused will further complicate the issue,
which was not intended by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as the
language employed in the order of the Supreme Court is unambiguous that
“to review the action of the enforcing authorities under the Act and screen
the cases registered under the provisions of the Act and decide the further
course of action in every matter and so on”. Thus, it is sufficient if the
actions initiated under the TADA Act are screened by high level Review
Committee, appropriate decision is taken and in this regard, the
representation by the petitioner in raising objections were considered by the
Review Committee and that itself is an opportunity provided to the
petitioner and such an opportunity would met the ends of justice and any
further opportunity is not contemplated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its
judgment and therefore, the procedures as contemplated in the present case,
considering the representations submitted by the petitioner/accused is in
consonance with the directives of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the
case of Kartar Singh Vs State of Punjab (cited supra) and there is no
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
infirmity and perversity as such.
20. The petitioner/accused is provided with several opportunities,
while conducting the trial before the Designated Court. All such
opportunities provided under the law is made available to the accused
persons and therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the case of the
petitioner is to be reviewed in every three months is not contemplated nor
directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
21. This apart, in the present case, the trial was concluded long
back and under these circumstances, no further adjudication needs to be
considered and consequently, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
23.11.2021
Jeni/Nti
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes
Speaking order : Yes
To
1.The Chief Secretary to Government,
The State of Tamil Nadu,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Ammapet Police Station,
Thiruvarur District.
3.The Designated Court,
Thiruchirapalli,
Tirchy District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Jeni
W.P.No.29590 of 2012
23.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
