High Court’s silence over JM’s role in father-son death slammed

Chennai

The incident is being compared to the killing of George Floyd in the US and the Madras High Court has come in for a lot of criticism over its silence on the role of the Judicial Magistrate who had mechanically remanded the duo into custody.

It is said that the Judicial Magistrate B Saravanan had not even bothered to see the father and son before remanding them, leave alone asking them about their injuries while the police in the FIR had conveniently claimed that the two had inflicted internal injuries on themselves by rolling on the floor.

Notwithstanding this, the High Court, while directing the police to submit a report, is yet to take cognisance of the Judicial Magistrate’s failure in executing his statutory duty, which otherwise could have saved the lives of the two persons.

The judiciary, for now, is maintaining a stoic silence on the role of the Judicial Magistrate, whose report remanding the duo is yet to be made public and remains highly questionable. Senior advocate M Radhakrishnan, while pointing out that under the Disaster Management rules in vogue the police had no right to enter the premises of the traders, said “Despite the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court taking suo motu cognisance of the deaths, it is silent on whether the said judicial magistrate had discharged his duties. No one knows as to whether they were produced through video conference or physically before him. If so, did he record their injuries? In all probability, the JM is also responsible for the death of both the persons and hence ought to have been suspended.”