Chennai police commissioner S George appears before Madras High Court
George arrived at the high court campus at 2 pm and was present in the court hall no. 16 at 2.05 pm.
Chennai: The Chennai police commissioner S.George appeared before the Madras high court on Friday in pursuance of the order of the court directing him to personally appear for filing belatedly the status report on cases pending with the Central Crime Branch (CCB) wing up to 2011. Recording his appearance, Justice S.Vaidyanathan, who had directed him to appear with a caution that the court may issue non-bailable warrant if he fails to appear before the court, dispensed with the further presence of the Commissioner of Police in court.
Commissioner of police George arrived at the high court campus at 2 pm and was present in the court hall no. 16 at 2.05 pm. When the case was taken up for hearing at 2.20 pm, State public prosecutor Rajarathinam informed the judge that the Commissioner of Police was present and he has filed a status report, giving categorisation of cases pending up to 2011. He prayed the court to grant six months time to complete the investigation in these cases and file charge sheet.
The matter relates to the court's August 2016 directive to file a status report of pending cases with CCB up to 2011 and reasons for delays, so as to ascertain whether there was any police collusion. The report was to be filed on or before December 6. Since it was not filed in time and no request was made to extend the time limit, the court sought to know the delay and directed the CoP to appear before the court and explain on March 20.
In his order, the judge said when the matter was taken up on March 20 this court directed the Commissioner of police to appear before this court on March 27. However, Public prosecutor represented that the CoP was not available in Chennai on March 27 and that the matter may be advanced for hearing on March 24. Accordingly, when the matter was taken up today, the CoP appeared before this court and filed a status report, dated March 24, 2017, the judge added.
The judge said public prosecutor submitted that admittedly no report was filed in this matter on or before December 6 and that the report dated February 2, 2017 could be filed before this court only on March 17. He also stated that a statement has been erroneously made by the Additional public prosecutor on March 20 that the report was filed before the I Additional Sessions Court in February 2017, based on the instructions received from the police. He also submitted that cases up to 2011, which were not stayed or pending before the Supreme Court, will be taken up and finalised within 6 months. The submission was recorded and the judge added posted to September 20 further hearing of the case.