“Actors change, actions do not,” the Madras High Court remarked as it ordered the DVAC to register an FIR at once over fake, AI-generated books in Tamil Nadu public libraries, with a freeze on the bank account of a publisher and disciplinary action, including suspension, against officials involved.
Madurai: Hearing a contempt petition over compliance with its own 2024 directions, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Tuesday directed the Tamil Nadu Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) to forthwith register an FIR over the alleged fraudulent procurement of fake, plagiarised and AI-generated books for public libraries across the State. It also ordered the immediate freezing of the bank account of Agal Vilakku Publication and its proprietor Mohan [Ramasubbu v. K. Gopal, IAS & Anr.].
A Division Bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan and Justice M.D. Sumathi passed the order on November 10, 2026 in a contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of the Court’s June 19, 2024 directions on procurement of library books. Justice Swaminathan authored the order.
The directions
- The DVAC shall forthwith register an FIR.
- The bank account of Agal Vilakku Publication, its proprietor Mohan and others involved shall be frozen immediately.
- The government shall immediately take disciplinary action, including suspension, against the officials involved.
- Librarians shall take inventory of suspect books and make them unavailable to readers.
- The Director of Public Libraries shall furnish the names of officials responsible for the procurement over the last two years and more, so they can be impleaded as contemnors, and file an affidavit setting out the sequence of events, the amount spent and the persons involved “from top to bottom”.
The matter is listed on November 11, 2026 at 2.15 PM. The allegations remain to be investigated; no one has been charged, and those named are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
The Court’s reasoning
The Bench recorded that the Director of Public Libraries, who appeared by video conference, did not take an adversarial stand, and the Additional Advocate General submitted that the government and the DVAC were actively acting on the matter. The Court said it was nonetheless concerned with “the majesty of this Court” and compliance with its orders.
Rule 18(4) of the Tamil Nadu Public Libraries Rules, 1950 bars books “of doubtful taste”. Reading it, the Court held:
“A book with dubious content and false narratives is certainly one with doubtful taste. AI-generated and plagiarised works also would fall within this ambit.”
Readers entering public libraries, it said, are entitled to presume the books are authentic. Stocking “bogus books with false content and books by phantom authors” breaches the Tamil Nadu Public Libraries Act, 1948 and infringes the right to receive accurate information under Article 19(1)(a).
On the absence of an FIR, the Bench recorded that the State Public Prosecutor suggested awaiting the DVAC’s enquiry, but answered in the negative when asked whether he would deny that a crime had been committed.
“Crores of rupees has gone out of the public exchequer. It is too obvious that a crime of this humongous proportion could not have taken place but for the active involvement of government servants. Not only the BNS provisions but also the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act stand attracted.”
Where the contempt petition came from
The petition, filed by Ramasubbu, named K. Gopal, IAS, Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education, and R.V. Shajeevana, IAS, Director of Public Libraries, as respondents. It alleged breach of the judgment in S. Krishnan v. Secretary to Government (W.P.(MD) No. 10150 of 2019), decided by a Bench of then Justice R. Mahadevan and Justice Swaminathan.
That 2024 judgment had found a “scam” in which out-of-copyright and nationalised works were republished under new titles and authors’ names and bought repeatedly by the State. It directed procurement in line with G.O.Ms. No. 69 (Transparent Book Procurement Policy, 2024), a public website listing shortlisted books with a month for objections, an inquiry committee report within five months, and action against officials.
The Bench noted that the original petition was filed under one government, decided under another, and that the present controversy arose under a third, remarking: “Actors change, actions do not.” It recorded that if its 2024 directions had been followed, books would not have been bought from “dubious entities” such as Agal Vilakku, Sigma and Phoenix publishers.
What came to light
The order records that writer Perumal Murugan flagged the procurement of so-called books for Periyar Arivulagam in Coimbatore on the eve of Diwali, leading to a public outcry. The government acknowledged that the system had been “taken for a huge ride”, relieved the then Director of Public Libraries of charge, cancelled existing procurement orders, and the DVAC began a detailed enquiry.
The Court noted that a book titled “Democracy and People’s Right in the Contemporary World”, attributed to economist Jean Dreze, was found at the Kalaignar Centenary Library in Madurai and has been denounced by him as fake. Works falsely attributed to poet Bharathiyar were also found in public libraries.
Why the order matters
The order uses the contempt jurisdiction to enforce a 2024 judgment that had already laid down a transparent system for buying library books. The Court made clear that a preliminary enquiry is no reason to delay registering an FIR where the commission of a cognisable offence is not disputed.
It also extends the “doubtful taste” bar in the library rules to non-fiction and expressly to AI-generated and plagiarised works, linking authentic library collections to the reader’s right to information under Article 19(1)(a). That reading may shape how public bodies vet content in the age of generative AI.
Case Title: Ramasubbu v. K. Gopal, IAS & Anr. [Cont. P.(MD) No. 3763 of 2026]
Bench: Justice G.R. Swaminathan and Justice M.D. Sumathi, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Date of Order: November 10, 2026
For the Petitioner: Senior Counsel K.P.S. Palanivel Rajan for Advocate P.M. Vishnu Varthanan
For the Respondents: Additional Advocate General B. Saravanan, assisted by Special Government Pleader M. Kannan; State Public Prosecutor John Sathyan