COVID-19 has had a crippling effect on regular functioning of courts across the State, but telecommunication technology has helped them stay the course. Despite the three-week lockdown, the Madras High Court on Monday used a video-conferencing mobile application to hear three urgent cases related to the pandemic and its aftermath.
Justices Vineet Kothari and R. Suresh Kumar heard arguments advanced by lawyers and law officers from their respective residences and instructed the police to be humane while dealing with individuals who venture out of their houses to access essential needs despite prohibitory orders promulgated under Section 144 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
“The court would not like to pass any specific direction to the State or the police in this regard but we expect the police to adopt a balanced and humane approach in this matter since the emergent situation on account of COVID-19 is a very unique kind of problem,” the judges said after Additional Advocate General P.H. Arvindh Pandian denied allegations of harassment.
When advocate T. Sivagnanasambandan, representing the litigant M.L. Ravi, produced some photographs to claim that police were harassing people who step out of their homes to purchase essential commodities, the judges directed the State government to appoint nodal officers, not below the rank of Deputy Tahsildar, at Firka level to issue permits to such people.
Making it clear that the court does not expect people to come out of their houses unnecessarily, the judges also granted liberty to the State to take safety measures to prevent such exodus. They also directed the AAG to submit a report after four weeks listing out the number of criminal cases booked by the police for violation of orders promulgated under Section 144.
Taking up another case filed by G. Muthu Kumar Nayakar of Villupuram, the judges directed a technical committee constituted by the State government to consider representations made for trying out alternative medicines such as Ayurveda, Siddha, Unani and Homeopathy to treat COVID-19 patients apart from using allopathic medicines.
“We hope and expect that the said committee and the State Government shall take appropriate decision in this matter as quickly as possible so that the public at large can avail the benefit of the same immediately,” the judges said and adjourned this case too by four weeks for reporting compliance of their order.
The third public interest litigation petition was the one filed by senior counsel A.E. Chelliah seeking a direction to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry and the State government to provide financial assistance of Rs.50,000 to every advocate and Rs.25,000 to every registered advocate clerk who had to lose their earnings during the lock down period.
Since the petitioner could not be contacted through phone on Monday, the judges ordered notices to the Bar Council as well as the government and asked them to respond within two weeks.
Meanwhile, the High Court administration has also compiled a long list of cases that it had heard despite the lock down and the list includes two suo motu public interest litigation petitions taken by it in the principal seat of the High Court in Chennai as well as its Madurai Bench to extend all interim orders till April 30 in order to prevent miscarriage of justice.
Apart from these cases heard by two Division Benches, one led by Justice M. Sathyanarayanan in Chennai and another by Justice P.N. Prakash in Madurai, Justice A.D. Jagadish Chandira too had heard a host of bail petitions and passed orders on them after hearing the arguments of the law officers over the telephone.
