The Madras High Court on Tuesday struck down two controversial suo motu orders passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge of Kancheepuram. The case involved allegations of judicial overreach, personal bias, and misuse of powers under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Background
The dispute began with a simple quarrel outside a bakery in Walajabad in July 2025. Complaints were lodged by both sides - one involving Parvathi and her family, the other connected to Lokeshwaran Ravi, a police officer who was then serving as Personal Security Officer (PSO) to the Sessions Judge. Initially, both complaints were closed after parties agreed to settle matters.
Read also:- Delhi High Court rejects husband's appeal challenging validity of marriage over Saptapadi ritual dispute
But weeks later, fresh FIRs were registered based on the same incidents, this time invoking the SC/ST Act. According to the petitioners, this sudden action came after the Judge suspected his PSO of sending anonymous complaints against him. They alleged that the Judge acted out of personal grudge.
Court's Observations
Justice N. Sathish Kumar of the Madras High Court did not mince words. Referring to the externment order dated 04 September 2025, he remarked that such drastic action under Section 10 of the SC/ST Act requires clear evidence of ongoing atrocities or likelihood of repeated offences.
Read also:- Bombay High Court Stresses Gradual Father-Daughter Reunion, Sets Next Hearing on Visitation Rights
"The complaints, on the face of it, show nothing beyond a quarrel over bakery purchases. To treat this as an atrocity case is unwarranted," the bench noted.
On the Judge's second order - remanding Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) M. Sankar Ganesh for allegedly failing to arrest the accused - the High Court was categorical. It stressed that the decision to arrest lies with the investigating officer, not the court.
"Merely because the DSP did not act on certain directions, it cannot be said he committed an offence under Section 4 of the Act," Justice Sathish Kumar observed.
The court also referred to a Supreme Court ruling from 2024 which clarified that penal action against public servants under Section 4 requires a prior administrative enquiry and recommendation. None existed in this case.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Grants One Last Chance for Cross-Examination in Property Dispute, Imposes Rs.50,000 Cost
Decision
Setting aside both orders of the Kancheepuram Judge, the High Court ordered the immediate release of DSP Sankar Ganesh from judicial custody. The externment directive against Lokeshwaran Ravi and others was also nullified.
Importantly, the bench directed the Registrar (Vigilance) of the High Court to conduct an independent enquiry into the allegations of bias and misuse of authority by the Principal District Judge. The report is to be submitted by September 23.
By closing, Justice Sathish Kumar emphasized that judicial powers must be exercised with caution, not as tools for settling personal scores.
Case Title: Lokeshwaran Ravi v. State of Tamil Nadu
Case No: Crl.O.P.Nos.24853 & 24866 of 2025
