Yesterday, On 9th October, The Madras High Court closed a habeas corpus petition related to the Samsung workers’ protest. According to the Additional Public Prosecutor, eight individuals arrested during the protest released after a magistrate declined to remand them. The court’s decision follows the resolution of the immediate concerns regarding their detention.
Chennai: The Madras High Court on Wednesday, October 9, 2024, dismissed a habeas corpus petition (HCP) concerning the arrest of eight individuals involved in a protest by Samsung India employees at Sunguvarchatram in Sriperumbudur, near Chennai.
Justices P.B. Balaji and G. Arul Murugan noted the statement from Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) A. Damodaran, who confirmed that the eight arrested employees had been released after a judicial magistrate refused to remand them to custody.
The APP informed the court that a First Information Report (FIR) filed against six named individuals and 30 unnamed persons under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including charges of deterring public servants, using criminal force, rioting, and intimidating the police. Following their arrest, the workers were granted bail with conditions.
APP Damodaran stated,
“All eight individuals are currently furnishing sureties, and I can provide evidence by making a video call to the concerned police inspector.”
He argued that the habeas corpus petition was unnecessary.
Conversely, advocate N.G.R. Prasad, representing the petitioner, E. Muthukumar of the Centre of Indian Trade Unions (CITU), criticized the police for acting in a high-handed manner by arresting workers protesting for their rights.
He emphasized that the High Court previously permitted a peaceful protest 500 meters away from the Samsung factory and argued that the workers’ right to protest should not be suppressed by such arrests or late-night remand attempts.
The habeas corpus petition filed with the intention of securing the release of the eight arrested workers, who had been taken into custody during the protest. A habeas corpus petition is typically filed when there are concerns about unlawful detention or if the petitioners believe that the arrested individuals are being held without sufficient legal grounds. In this case, the petitioners argued that the arrests were unjust and sought the court’s intervention to ensure their release.
Read Also: Bombay High Court’s Interpretation on ‘Outraging Modesty’ Under Scrutiny
However, during the proceedings, the Additional Public Prosecutor informed the court that the arrested individuals had been released. According to the prosecutor, a magistrate had refused to remand them, and as a result, the workers were let off. This development rendered the habeas corpus petition moot, as the individuals were no longer in custody, leading the Madras High Court to close the case. While the petitioners’ immediate objective of securing the workers’ release was achieved, the closure of the case signals the end of legal proceedings in this specific instance.
This case serves as a reminder that while legal mechanisms like habeas corpus petitions can protect individuals from unlawful detention, the resolution of legal issues does not always equate to the resolution of the underlying social and labor-related problems that sparked the protests in the first place.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
