Law enforcers should not act as law breakers, Madras HC says while quashing 26 FIRs against journalist

Read Order: V.Anbazhagan v. The Inspector of Police And Ors 

Pankaj Bajpai

Chennai, July 8, 2021: While quashing over two dozen cases lodged against a journalist after calling them baseless, the Madras High Court has cautioned law enforcement officers that their role is to safeguard citizens complying with the rule of law rather than protecting those who flaunt their power when corrupt acts are exposed by whistleblowers.

Justice M Dhandapani observed that the law enforcing agency should take steps to apprehend persons who are corrupt, and not go after the persons who bring to light illegal acts. 

The High Court made the observations while dealing with cases that were registered against a journalist named Anbazhagan, accusing him of extorting money from government servants by threatening to publish scandalous material against them in the daily ‘Ullatchi Alasal’.

The journalist was also detained under the Goondas Act but was released after the High Court granted relief in a habeas corpus petition. 

Observing that there are several cases where the police fail to register FIRs even if there is prima facie material to do so, the Bench said as many as 26 FIRs were filed against Anbazhagan despite there being little basis for such complaints.

The High Court found that the chargesheet does not reveal any materials which are pertinent to point a finger on the petitioner and only minimalistic materials, in the form of evidence of some witnesses, have been placed in support of the said charges. 

Expressing shock on the basis on which cognizance has been taken by the concerned Magistrate Court, the Bench stated the incarnation of the petitioner is wholly unjustified when there are such glaring discrepancies in the materials and full-fledged investigative flaw. 

Pulling up the State police for their lethargic and high-handed attitude in acting against the journalist, the High Court said in this case the law enforcers acted as lawbreakers.

Justice Dhandapani further observed that authorities in the law enforcing department should keep a check on their subordinates so that their functioning is for the interest of the common man and not to perpetrate illegal acts.

Citing the instant case as a classic example where a law abiding citizen was made to run from pillar to post to get himself absolved from penal action after he brought certain illegal acts to the notice of the law enforcers, Justice Dhandapani stated cases were filed against him by the police under the guise of upholding the rule of law but the police action was aimed at safeguarding certain unscrupulous elements, who are “cobwebs in the governmental machinery”.

The High Court found it difficult to understand how a ransom would have been made by the petitioner when scandalous materials have already been published. The Court further opined that if any publication is defamatory, defamation proceedings could have been initiated u/s 499 of the IPC. 

Hence, the Court quashed all FIRs registered against Anbazhagan as well as the cases pending against him before the Magistrate.