JANAKI RAMCHANDRAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions coming on for hearing upon perusing the petitions and the affidavit filed in support of Crl. M.P. No. 1196/88 and the counter affidavit filed with Cri. M.P. Nos. 1196 to 1200 of 1988 and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. T.S. Arunachalam, for M/s. M. Karpagavinayagam K.V. Sridharan and M. Balu and S. Elumalai Advocates for the petitioners in Crl. M.P. Nos. 1196 to 1200 of 1983 and respondents 1 to 3 in Crl. M.P. No. 1518/88 of Mr. A.N. Rajan, Government Advocate on behalf of the respondent in Crl. M. P. Nos. 1196 to 1200 of 1988 and for the 4th respondent in Crl. M.P. No. 1518/88 and of Mr. C.P. Pattabiraman, advocate for the petitioner in Crl. M.P. No. 1518/88, the Court made the following order :-

(2.) The second petitioner has filed the affidavit on behalf of himself, and the first and third petitioners, contending that the first petitioner Thirumathi Janaki Ramchandran is the President of the A.I.A.D.M.K. party and the third petitioner is one of the Deputy, General Secretaries of the Party and the second petitioner is the Acting General Secretary in charge of the Party. They have received subpoena from the Additional District Magistrate stating that an enquiry under S.145 Cr. P.C. in connection with the dispute over the possession of the building bearing No. 275, Avvai Shanmugham Salai, Madras. 14, is pending and it appears to the Magistrate that they are likely to give material evidence. They have been summoned to appear before him on 22-2-1988 to, testify what they knew concerning the matter.

(3.) According to the petitioners no other order had been served on any of them and the subpoena has been entrusted to their Advocate to verify the nature and details of the proceedings. Their Advocate filed vakalat before the Additional District Magistrate and prayed permission to peruse the records and the said counsel perused the entire records in the proceedings and they became aware of the details relating to the proceedings and besides the three petitioners 10 others had been shown as A Party But no communication had been issued to them about the proceedings. The papers to the proceedings pending reveal that a case in Crime No. 129 of 1988 had been registered in E. 2 Royapettah Police Station on 31-1-1988 and the first information report had been sent to the learned Additional District Magistrate with the key with which additional lock had been put up in the premises by the police. The key had been handed over to the learned Additional District Magistrate on 3-2-1988 by the Inspector of Police, E.2 Royapettah Police Station.