Thursday, Nov 13, 2003
Front Page |
Southern States |
Other States |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |
By Our Legal Correspondent
M.U. Rehman, IAS (retd.), and Arvind S. Inamdar, IPS (retd.), are the other members of the committee.
Talking to presspersons, Mr. Justice Saharya said, "We discussed at length all the cases and in particular the cases of Mr. Vaiko, Mr. Gopal and others arrested in Tamil Nadu. All the materials collected by us were perused."
Asked whether any decision was arrived at, he said, "At present we cannot say anything as the matter is part-heard. Something may emerge from the meeting tomorrow as we are to chalk out a course of action on these cases."
Asked about the nature of reply sent by Tamil Nadu in the case of Mr. Vaiko, he said the State Government had said that the trial was going on in the special POTA court and some witnesses had already been examined; Mr. Vaiko had challenged the validity of Sec. 21 (3) of POTA (under which he was arrested for supporting a banned organisation) in the Supreme Court, which had reserved its orders. "These aspects would have to be borne in mind by the committee," he added.
The committee has been empowered to decide whether there is a prima facie case for proceeding against the accused arrested under POTA and issue directions accordingly.
The committee is now vested with powers to go into the root of the matter and decide whether or not the invocation of POTA in their cases was warranted and then give its finding which would be binding on the enforcement authorities, viz., the Centre, the State and police.
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of