People in high post like RS Bharathi should show restraint: HC

"Therefore, the liberty of the person cannot be curtailed when the trial Court has exercised discretion properly in a judicial manner and granted bail, he said in the order. The CCB sought cancellation of the bail granted by the Special Judge at Chennai under SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on June 1.

The Madras High Court on Tuesday declined to cancel the bail granted to senior DMK functionary and MP R S Bharathi in a case filed against him for alleged disparaging remarks against the Scheduled Caste community, but observed people holding high office like him should show restraint while making any utterences. Dismissing an appeal filed by the Central Crime Branch (CCB) police, N Sathish Kumar held that the cancellation of bail jeopardise the personal liberty and it cannot be made in routine manner.

He noted that the trial court which granted the bail had considered all relevant materials and indicated reasons and exercised its discretion judicially. "Therefore, the liberty of the person cannot be curtailed when the trial Court has exercised discretion properly in a judicial manner and granted bail, he said in the order.

The CCB sought cancellation of the bail granted by the Special Judge at Chennai under SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on June 1. Bharathi, DMK organising secretary, was arrested on May 23 by the CCB in connection with his alleged disparaging remarks against some former judges of SC community in February after a complaint was lodged by Kalyana Sundaram of Adi Thamizhar Makkal Katchi.

As no action was taken by the police despite filing an FIR, the complainant moved the high court which had on May 12 directed the investigation officer to complete the probe and file a final report within 30 days. Justice Sathish Kumar said Bharathi, an advocate, was a senior member of the Bar and Member of Rajya Sabha and belongs to a political party and has several followers. Hence he should have exercised restraint while making any remark.

He, however, said whether the statements would attract the provisions the SC/SCT (Prevention of Atrocities) Act or not were matter of trial. The Judge refused to accept the arguments of the prosecution that custodial interrogation was required for getting the voice samples of Bharathi to prove the contents.

If the voice sample was required from the accused, the prosecution can seek assistance of the court, file an application for getting it, he added..

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)