Chennai corporation workers' strike: Madras HC orders immediate release of lawyers, law students

CHENNAI: Holding a prima facie view that the detention of four lawyers and two law students, in connection with the strike of the sanitation workers of Greater Chennai Corporation (GCC), is illegal, the Madras High Court on Thursday ordered the immediate release of all of them with certain conditions. A division bench of justices MS Ramesh and V Lakshminarayanan passed the orders after hearing the urgent habeas corpus petitions (HCPs). We are of the prima facie view that the detention of 4 Lawyers and 2 Law Students by the Police may be unlawful. It is also brought to our notice that all the arrested persons have not been produced before the concerned Magistrate's Court for remand, the bench said in the order. It directed the respondent police to release forthwith the detainees: Lawyers K Bharathi, president of Uzhaippor Urimai Iyakkam, which spearheaded the strike, K Suresh, Mohan Babu, R Rajkumar; and law students Muthuselvan and Valarmathi. The court imposed the condition that these six shall not give any interviews or statements to the media or post anything on social media regarding the workers strike until the next hearing on August 21. Chennai corporation sanitation workers protesting against privatisation forcefully evicted by police The petitions alleged that five lawyers and eight law students were illegally detained since midnight on Wednesday when the police forcefully removed the striking workers from near Ripon Building. The counsels for the petitioners stated that lawyers were not allowed to meet the detainees and expressed fear that the police may subject them to custodial torture. However, Additional Advocate General J Ravindran, appearing for the respondent authorities, submitted that seven FIRs have been registered against these six, and the remaining were let off after enquiry. He informed that the FIRs were registered by the Periamet and Anna Salai police stations under various sections for alleged rioting and damaging buses. The AAG produced a copy of an accident register of a woman constable suffering injury and video clips of alleged offences committed by the accused. Pointing out that as many as 930 were detained by the police including these, the bench said the accident register does not specifically implicate the six. Referring to the allegations of damaging the buses, the bench said, On a prima facie view, the persons accused of having caused rioting were arrested and confined inside the buses, and the damage to the buses seems to have happened later. Earlier, the judges sought to recuse from hearing the petitions citing the fact that the brother of Justice Lakshminarayanan had appeared for a PIL petitioner in connection with the strike. However, they agreed to hear the matter as the counsels for the petitioners and the AAG said they had no objections.