Salem police commissioner appears before HC in contempt case

Image
Press Trust of India Chennai
Last Updated : Jul 04 2017 | 10:22 PM IST
The Salem police commissioner and his two subordinates today appeared before the Madras High court in response to to a contempt of court notice for their alleged failure in removing encroachments around the Rajaganapathi temple in Salem.
The Salem police commissioner appeared before a bench of Justice N Kirubakaran along with Assistant Commissioner of Police (Law and Order) of Salem south division and ACP (Traffic).
The others, who appeared before the bench included Salem Fire and Rescue Services' division officer and the executive engineer of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HRCE).
In their affidavits, the officials claimed that as on date there was no encroachment around the temple.
The police had fully assisted the corporation in removing the encroachments, they said.
The judge dispensed with their further appearance before the court and posted the contempt of court plea against them for further hearing to July 24.
The plea had been filed by A Radhakrishnan, a trustee of Arulmighu Sugavaneswarar Thirukoil, Salem, seeking initiation of contempt of court proceeding against police officials for their alleged failure in providing protection to a committee for inspecting and removing encroachments as ordered by the court earlier.
The judge had summoned the officials on June 22.
The matter pertained to the obstruction of drainage around the Rajaganapathi temple, a sub-temple of the Sugavaneshvarar Swamy shrine.
Special government pleader M Maharaja sought time to give details as to what action has been taken based on the joint inspection report.
He also informed the court that an FIR was pending against the petitioner for allegedly threatening Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments officials.
The judge directed the HRCE to produce the CCTV footage on the happenings said to have occurred inside the office premises on February 7, on the basis of which an FIR has been filed against the petitioner.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jul 04 2017 | 10:22 PM IST

Next Story