Controversy of Arrests in Tamil Nadu About Construction of Flyovers - Court Flak

Court Flak

Court found fault with the Government on several counts

1. Judge found fault with Chennai Corporation Commissioner Acharyalu for making a hasty complaint as he had been appointed to his post only a week ago he could not know what had happened between 1998 and 2000 when a traffic improvement committee and a high-level steering committee were set up to ease traffic and the construction of flyovers was given to contractors. He could not have known how the accused received financial benefit.
2. Acharyalu gave the complaint directly to CB-CID and not through the chief Secretary as is the normal procedure
3. Acharyalu had not consulted the engineers and councillors involved in the project before giving complaint.
4. Judge wanted the Special Public Prosecutor Mr. A. Raghunathan to pinpoint who was the main accused. Mr. A. Raghunathan replied that he could not pinpoint the main accused to the surprise of the judge.
5. Judge found fault that no investigation was done apart from Acharyalu's complaint and a few files with the corporation
6. The Judge disapproved of the manner in which the complaint was made, the FIR registered and the arrests carried out.
7. P. Padmanabhan, investigating officer said none of the accused including Karunanidhi or the other 14 accused received any pecuniary benefits raising questions about the motive of the FIR.
8. Judge was surprised that the main accused could not be pinpointed, the accused received no benefit further no investigation was done prior to the arrest leading to questioning the motive of the arrest.
9. Judge further noted the way the complaint was lodged and FIR registered without examining witnesses shows that the only motive was to arrest some people. They called an abuse of power.
10. Court wondered why in a normal corruption case, a First Information Report is filed, the case investigated, a chargesheet is made and a court decides whether to give bail to the accused or not. In this case, the FIR was filed at night and arrests were made at midnight. The accused were those leaders who were not likely to abscond. Why these procedures were not followed?