When Courtrooms Become Political Galleries

Tamil Nadu: The hallowed precincts of the courtrooms rarely draw the collective attention of the hoi poi that is basically interested more in politics and knowing about the diabolic machinations of politicians that nowadays lead to varied alleys including morgues. But last week the judiciary took the centre stage of State politics, giving rise to a doubt in the minds of many if the State government was being pushed to a blind alley, as the Supreme Court came out with observations or decisions on several cases. Prominent among them was the Court raising questions in cases relating to the mayhem at the campaign rally of the Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam (TVK) at Karur on September 27.

The tragedy that claimed a heavy toll of 41 innocent lives has been the subject of discussion in the political arena with the ruling DMK trying to defend itself from the onslaught of allegations against the government by almost everyone opposed to the ruling dispensation and TVK making an attempt to absolve itself of all charges against it. Even the popular indictment of TVK’s top honchos, including founder president Vijay, scooting the scene immediately and not helping out the victims was sought to be defended by a top leader through a strange claim that the party was observing a 16-day mourning.

Whatever the government and the opposition parties – yes, they have all united in their support to the TVK now as they have found it in a stick to beat the DMK - have to say in the public sphere, including the social media where TVK acolytes distinctly spewed toxicity and those opposed to the party mocked and ridiculed the Karur mess up, the matter went to court. Interestingly, the principal bench of the Madras High Court in Chennai and a two-member bench sitting in Madurai heard the case simultaneously, which was questioned by the Supreme Court where the TVK went with an appeal.

The Supreme Court’s queries over the principal bench’s jurisdiction on the case, the manner in which postmortem was conducted on dozens of bodies the very night the tragedy struck and the reason for allowing Vijay to hold the very rally in Karur were seen as setbacks for the government by some. However, by raising those questions, the Supreme Court was not turning the blame on the State Government. Since the court has reserved its orders, some people were pointing to the observation of the TVK lawyer over the appointment of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) and hoped that it could turn against the government.

TVK’s lawyer said that when the petition in the Madras High Court was to frame Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for political rallies, the court constituted the SIT, over which the party had a problem as it comprised officers only from the State. So, the political wrangle between the DMK and TVK was taken to the Supreme Court, making that a spectacle for onlookers with the State government defending the constitution of the SIT by averring that it did not suggest any names to the High Court. But the senior counsel, appearing for the State government, said that the officers were known for their integrity leaving no scope for suspecting their independence.

Even to the questions raised by the Supreme Court like the one on the conduct of mass autopsies, the State government gave its replies. The post mortems were done on 30 bodies the same night of the stampede within four hours because the families of the victims were pleading with the authorities for release of the mortal remains, the government explained. However, the disaster that was earlier given a total political colour without any room for collective mourning by society has now taken a judicial contour with the parties waiting for the Supreme Court to give its verdict. So, it would be the court that would decide who is to be blamed for the stampede.

Similarly, another crime that was already painted in political colours also reached the Supreme Court to take a curious turn. The diabolic murder of BSP State president Amstrong on July 5, 2024, near his house in Chennai by a gang of assailants who fled the scene immediately became a sensational case as it was termed as a political murder right from the beginning though the police tried to dismiss it as an act of vendetta by local gangs. The police went ahead to investigate the case and file a 7,411 page charge sheet, arraigning 30 persons, when the Madras High Court intervened and stayed the charge sheet after Amstrong’s brother sought a CBI probe into the case as he found shortcomings in the investigations.

Apart from handing over the case to the CBI as demanded by the brother, the High Court also quashed the charge sheet filed by the police. So when the State government went on an appeal, the Supreme Court quashed the stay on the charge sheet but allowed the CBI investigation. While the legal nuances of the order are not clear, the CBI will investigate the murder of Amstrong, which many see as a setback to the State government. On the same line, the Supreme Court upholding the Madras High Court order for independent SIT probe into the kidney trafficking racket in Namakkal district, after rejecting the State government’s plea to appoint its officers, is also seen as something going against the government though the real offenders are private hospitals.