Defending a Maoist in court not a crime: Madras high court

CHENNAI: Asserting that the defence of a Maoist by a lawyer in a court of law cannot be construed a crime, the Madras high court has discharged an advocate from a criminal case registered by the Q branch police under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for his alleged connection with the extremists. “If a Maoist accused of an offence seeks the professional assistance of a lawyer it is his/her duty to defend him,” Justice M V Muralidharan said.
The judge further concurred with the submission of the advocate that with an ulterior motive to prevent him from defending ‘innocent Maoists’, he had been implicated in the case and said, “As a lawyer, the petitioner is said to have contacted the accused persons and during meeting some conversations took place between them. For example, meeting of an accused person in the prison by a lawyer, would not mean that there was criminal conspiracy between them.”

The issue pertains to arrest of advocate Murugan based on the confession of one of the Maoist accused that on January 14, 2017 the advocate handed a DVD player, a tape recorder, a modem and some pamphlets and booklets to him at Madurai Mattuthavani bus stand for the use of the banned CPI (Maoist).

Aggrieved, advocate Murugan moved a discharge plea in the high court claiming that the only with an ulterior motive to prevent the petitioner from defending the innocent Maoists, he has been falsely implicated in the case on hand.

Resisting the discharge petition, the Q branch police contended that incriminating materials, electronic items, pamphlets seized based on the confession of the first accused would clearly reveal the common object and intention of the petitioner.

“Murugan was a member of the banned CPI (Maoist) organisation. The prosecution has made out a prima facie case against the petitioner. There were no valid grounds to discharge the petitioner and the grounds stated in the discharge petition were untenable,” the police said.

Refusing to concur with the submission, the judge said except the confession statement, there is no iota of materials available on record to attract the ingredients of the offences alleged against the petitioner. The court then discharged Murugan from all the offences charged.