Chennai Police Commissioner ordered to appear before Madras High Court
Since the commissioner failed to comply with this direction, the petitioner through his counsel filed the present contempt petition.
Chennai: Pulling up Chennai police commissioner S. George for his failure to comply with a court order, which directed him to provide police protection to a whistle-bowler, the Madras high court has ordered his appearance before the court in connection with a contempt of court case.
Flaying the attitude of officers not complying with court orders or refusing to appear before courts, Justice N. Kirubakaran said, “If senior officers themselves do not obey the order of the court, what about their subordinate officers. How they will respect the court orders?”
Hearing a contempt petition from the whistlebowler Pon Thangavelu, Justice Kirubakaran said, “Court is not a place of sin, and the commissioner need not consider appearing before the court as a prestige issue. It is not a luxury for us to call the officers and see their face. Government pleaders and prosecutors are made scapegoats for violations committed by officers. There are instances where the government advocates personally pleaded with me to spare the officers. Let him appear tomorrow or the day after at his convenience”.
Turning down a plea from advocate general R. Muthukumaraswamy to exempt the personal appearance of commissioner of police, the judge said, “Contempt of court proceedings appearance of the person concerned is mandatory. Please do not embarrass the court”. The judge added, “Why so many senior law officers, including AG and additional AG, should represent the case?”
Originally, contending that Annamalai, a councillor of the Chennai corporation was paying a meagre amount of Rs 55 to Rs 110 as property tax for his five bungalows in Injabakkam, Pon Thangavelu filed a petition in the Madras high court. Subsequently, it also came to light that the councillor owned properties worth several crores but declared as nil in his election affidavit. The court also directed the commissioner of police to provide protection to the petitioner.
Since the commissioner failed to comply with this direction, the petitioner through his counsel filed the present contempt petition.