HC dismisses petitions seeking judicial probe into man's death

Dismissing the petitions which also sought withdrawal of police and supply of essential commodities to people of Idanthakarai, the nerve centre of the stir and Kudankulam, justices K Suguna and R Mala said the petitioners had not given particulars of houses reportedly destroyed by police in the two villages nor of alleged police atrocities.

Only the death of a person, reportedly of shock after a Coast Guard Aircraft on surveillance over the area descended below 300 feet had been brought to its notice. Here too, a case had been registered at a police station at Kudankulam. Hence the petitioner cannot get any relief.

The judges said people could not take the issue in their own hands and deal with it as they liked just because India is a democracy. That would be destruction of the rule of law.

The contention that the court could not decide on merits and demerits of an issue but only by people could not be accepted. If this were so, it would lead to disastrous results, which would have a serious consequence in every aspect.

"If people can do anything, we are not able to understand why courts are there? And what is the purpose of courts passing orders?"

"If agitators can take the law in their own hands as they like and march towards the nuclear plant and to cause damage to it, if this is not said to be a criminal act, we are unable to understand what other act can be termed as a criminal act."

Petitioners should give details when they seek to withdraw excess police personnel or seek a court direction to officials to stop police 'excesses' or seek a judicial probe by a district judge or seek compensation, the court said.

No complaints had been lodged against police or officials. The block development officer had given particulars on supply of essential commodities and this proved the petitioners were not correct.

If agitators had been attacked, complaints would have been lodged by people of the area who were educated, the court said.