Madras High Court Constitutes Commission Led By Retd Judge To Probe Allegations Of Police Violence Against Detained Lawyers

The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice V Lakshminarayanan asked the Legal Services Authority to provide assistance to the commission. The commission has been directed to probe into the allegations levelled by both parties and submit a report by the next date of hearing. 

The lawyers and law students had alleged that the police had used excessive force while detaining them. The state, on the other hand, had argued that the protestors had caused damage to public and private property. 

The orders were passed on a habeas corpus petition challenging the alleged illegal detention of lawyers and law students who had participated in the protests held by the sanitation workers in Chennai, challenging the Greater Chennai Corporation's decision to privatise the sanitation work in some zones.

On 13^th August, the Madras High Court bench headed by Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava had directed the State to take action to remove the protesting sanitary workers, who had been protesting in front of the Rippon Building for almost 12 days. The bench had noted that proper permission had not been obtained for the protest and thus asked the protestors to conduct the protest after taking due permission, not causing any inconvenience to the public.

Following this, on the night of 13^th August, when the police tried to remove the protestors, it led to an altercation between the police and the lawyers and law students who had joined the protestors. Following this the lawyers and law students, along with protestors were detained by the police. The present habeas corpus petition was filed challenging the detention.

In an interim order, the court had directed the 4 lawyers and 2 law students to be released, after noting that their detention was prima facie unlawful. However, the lawyers and the law students were asked not to give any press interviews or statements or post anything on social media regarding the issue at hand.

While reserving the orders, the court had mulled the idea of appointing a one-man committee headed by a retired judge of the High Court to investigate into the alleged violence that was meted out to the lawyers and the law students. This was after the petitioner's counsel alleged that the police had used excessive force on the protestors and thus a probe was necessary to ascertain the truth.

The State, on the other hand, had denied use of excessive force. When asked if the case against the lawyers and law students could be dropped, the state informed the bench that dropping the case would send a wrong message, as if lawyers were above the law. The State also submitted that apart from government property, individuals were also affected by the action of the lawyers and the law students and thus, it would not be wise to drop the case.

Case Title: S. Vijay v. The Commissioner of Police

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 293

Case No: HCP 1599 of 2025