Look into charges against senior cops

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has directed the State government and the DGP to look into a complaint from a person levelling serious allegations against the higher police officials, including former Coimbatore City Police Commissioner C Shylendra Babu.  The allegations include assault of G Karunairaj in the Special Camp for Foreigners in Chengalpattu and molestation of his 18-year-old daughter at Coimbatore.Justice V Ramasubramanian, who gave the direction on Feb 29 last, also set aside an order dated November 9 last year of the government detaining Karunairaj in the Special Camp under the Foreigners Act. The direction was to avoid an impression that serious allegations against higher officials would get wiped under the carpet, he said.The judge was allowing a writ petition from Karunairaj challenging his detention in the special camp.According to his counsel M Sreedhar, Karunairaj came to Chennai along with his wife and three children and stayed in a hotel in the city on Aug 21, 2010. The same night, a team of police in plain clothes took the family to Coimbatore. His children, including his elder 18-year-old daughter, were separated and kept in some other place in Coimbatore, where she was allegedly molested. The petitioner, who had been lodged in the Central Prison in Puzhal in connection with various cases, obtained bail in the cases and came out on November 8 last year. However, the very next day, he was detained in the Special Camp in Chengalpattu under the Foreigners Act. Hence, the present writ petition to quash the November 9 order. Justice Ramasubramanian, however, observed that he could not go into the allegations of the petitioner against the then Coimbatore CoP, since he was not impleaded as a party in the writ petition.Accepting the arguments of Sreedhar, the judge observed that Karunairaj could not be detained under the Foreigners Act, as Malaysia, one of the Commonwealth countries, was exempted from the applicability of the Act.Karunairaj was released on bail on Nov 8 and he was detained under the Act the very next day. It showed the haste in which the government had acted. No opportunity was given to him to explain his stand. He would have proved that he was an Indian citizen (as claimed by him) or at least shown that the Act itself was not applicable to a person who was stated to be a national of one of the Commonwealth countries.