MADURAI
The State submitted its intelligence reports on the anti-Sterlite protests and Thoothukudi firing in a sealed cover to the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Thursday.
However, the video evidence was turned down by the court on a question of law. Additional Advocate General P.H. Arvindh Pandian offered to play the video evidence to the judges alone, which was objected by senior counsel N.R. Elango.
Mr. Elango raised his objection on the grounds that video evidence could have been doctored. This could imperil justice, he said. At that point, advocate Henri Tiphagne said he too had videos collected as evidence and offered to play them. Video evidences should not be played in each other’s absence, he said.
Submitting his arguments on the allegations of multiple FIRs being registered on people in Thoothukudi, Mr. Arvindh Pandian told the court that the second FIR was based on subsequent complaints on continued occurrences.
The security of the State included even a part of a State. National security could not be confined to just cases like armed rebellion, he said on the detentions in Thoothukudi. The interest of the public was paramount and the agitators had clearly violated Section 144 of the Cr.P.C. and they were not innocent. “Let them face trial and prove their innocence,” he said.
Mr. Elango submitted that a second FIR could not be filed on the same occurrence. They were being registered merely on Section 161 Cr.P.C. (Examination of witnesses by police) statements, he pointed out.
A division bench of Justices C.T. Selvam and A.M. Basheer Ahamed observed that should there be contradicting reports and charge sheets were to be filed on each of them, where would one start and end. The court will continue to hear arguments in the case on Friday.