New Delhi: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has set aside the acquittal of granite baron PR Palanisamy of PRP Granites and of his son P Suresh Kumar and one Sahadevan. They were caught in the illegal granite mining case filed against them in 2013.
In doing so, Justice B Pugalendhi also expressed his anguish over requests for his recusal from the matter. This was despite a detailed order justifying why such recusal was not warranted in the matter.
The order was passed on a batch of appeals filed by the government and the then Collector of Madurai, Anshul Mishra, against the magistrate’s order.
Justice B Pugalendhi had set aside an order passed by Melur magistrate court in March 2016 and sent the case back to the special court, constituted under Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act in Madurai.
The court also expunged the remarks made by the judicial magistrate against the then Collector of Madurai, Anshul Mishra, who had lodged the complaint against the above three.
The court cited the various objections made by the counsels appearing on behalf of the granite firm seeking his recusal from the case on grounds that he had appeared against the firm on behalf of the government in several cases. The court observed: “Judicial independence is defined as a prerequisite to the rule of law and a fundamental guarantee of fair proceedings.”
“Suresh Kumar had also written a letter to the Registrar on August 6, 2020, alleging that the judge, in a speech at a school annual day programme, had attributed the delay in his elevation as High Court judge to the lobbying done by the granite miners,” the court noted.
The court made the above observation, stating that the speech had been edited and projected in such a way by the accused to evade the cases.
The judge said: “Though he filed these complaints in his official capacity, it is unfortunate that the state has not come to the rescue of an officer who has discharged his duty diligently on behalf of the state,” pointing out how Mishra had faced allegations of perjury, and had to engage a private counsel to defend himself.
Read Also: Exams issue: Arguments inconclusive, SC to hear again on Aug 18
The court has directed the present collector of Madurai to appear before the trial court within two months for a cross examination. The trial court was ordered to complete the trial within two months after completion of the cross examination.
Read the order here;
Anshul-Mishra-v-The-District-Collector-Madurai– India Legal Bureau