Madras High Court disposes of PIL seeking CBI probe into Jayalalithaa’s death

Madras HC records CBI counsel's submission to consider PIL for court-monitored CBI probe into Jayalalithaa's death. AG informs court of mandatory State govt consent for CBI probe. PIL petitioner's counsel argues for tabling of Commission of Inquiry report. HC records CBI counsel's submission to consider petitioner's representation.

The Madras High Court on Wednesday recorded the submission of a counsel for Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) that a representation made by a litigant for conducting a probe into the death of former Chief Minister Jayalalithaa, in the light of the report of Justice A. Arumughaswamy Commission of Inquiry, would be considered on its own merits.

First Division Bench of Chief Justice S.V. Gangapurwala and Justice P.D. Audikesavalu disposed of a public interest litigation petition filed by R.R. Gopaljee, publisher of two editions of a vernacular newspaper, after recording the submission made by the CBI counsel. The petition had been filed for a court monitored CBI probe into the death of Jayalalithaa.

During the course of arguments, Advocate General R. Shunmugasundaram told the court that the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 makes it mandatory to obtain the State government’s consent before CBI could conduct any probe and that the government had in June this year withdrawn the general consent that had been granted to the investigating agency.

The PIL petitioner’s counsel told the court that the Commission of Inquiry itself was instituted due to doubtful circumstances under which the former Chief Minister had died. He also said that the Commission’s report had so far not been tabled before the Legislative Assembly though the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 requires the government to do so.

However, the Chief Justice told the counsel that the present plea would not strictly fall under the category of public interest litigation and hence it would be suffice to dispose of the case by recording the submission of the CBI counsel that the petitioner’s representation, made on December 3, 2022, would be considered appropriately.