SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Thiru.Dayanidhi Maran, (Male/Age 57 Yrs)S/o Late Thiru. Murasoli MaranNo.3, First Avenue,Boat Club Raja Annamalaipuram,Chennai-600028 …Complainant-Vs- Edapadi.palanisamy /complaint copy/

by ·

M/s R.VIVEKANANDAN
M.A.VIMAL MOHAN
SENTHIL MURUGAN

IN THE COURT OF HONOURABLE XIII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
AT EGMORE, CHENNAI

C.C.No. of 2024

Thiru.Dayanidhi Maran, (Male/Age 57 Yrs)
S/o Late Thiru. Murasoli Maran
No.3, First Avenue,
Boat Club Raja Annamalaipuram,
Chennai-600028 …Complainant
-Vs-

Edapaddi K.Palanisami (Male/69 Years),
S/o. Karuppa Gounder,
Office at No 226/275, Avvai Shanmugam Salai,
Llyods Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600014 … Accused

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC.199 OF Cr.P.C FOR OFFENCES UNDER
SEC. 499 & 500 0F THE I.P.C.

The Complainant humbly submits as follows:

  1. The complainant is Mr.Dayanidhi Maran, Son of Murasoli Maran, aged about 57 years, residing at No.3, First Avenue, Boat Club Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai-600028.

The address for service of all notices and processes of his Hon’ble Court on the complainant is that of his Counsels M/s R.VIVEKANANDAN, M.A.VIMAL MOHAN, .SENTHIL MURUGAN Advocates, having their office at 299 Additional Law Chambers, High Court Buildings, Chennai – 600 0104.

  1. The accused is Edapaddi K.Palanisami (Male/69 Years), S/o. Karuppa Gounder,Office at Office at No 226/275, Avvai Shanmugam Salai, Llyods Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600014

The address for service of all notices and processes on the accused is at their addresses as stated above.

  1. The complainant submits that he is a Member of Parliament having held various responsible portfolios and served as a Union Cabinet Minister. He is actively involved in Politics and is a member of a prominent political party. The complainant apart from his political life is involved himself in various social service activities and he, as a former union minister and as a prominent politician is widely known in the society and he is a familiar person. The complainant is also known for his decent and humble behaviour in the political circle and is never involved in any controversy either in his personal life or in his public life. The Complainant has been honoured on several occasions by celebrated personalities for doing commendable work as a Cabinet Minister. The Complainant further submits that he was elected thrice as a Member of Parliament to Lok Sabha from Chennai Central constituency during the 2004 general elections, 2009 General elections and 2019 general elections. The Complainant further submits that he is presently contesting the 2024 General Elections for Member of Parliament in Chennai Central constituency. The complainant enjoys a high reputation in the society.
  2. The complainant submits that during his tenure as a Minister he had performed remarkably as a minister to the best of his abilities and thereby led India in the forefront of Telecommunication system. He is the one who introduced one rupee one India plan, connecting Kashmir to Kannyakumari and created a telecom revolution in the country.
  3. The Complainant submits that as a Member of Parliament as well as the member of the Ruling Party by his innumerous contributions in the political arena, by his hard work and determination over the period of time, he has earned a good reputation among the people across the globe in both politically as well as socially.
    [
  4. The Complainant further submits that the accused herein who is the current leader of opposition Political party (AIADMK) in the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly and the Former Chief minister of Tamil Nadu (AIADMK Political Party) from 2017 to 2021 who is now in alliance with the DMDK Political party for the present General Elections 2024 .
  5. The Complainant submits that the accused while addressing a public gathering on 15.04.2024 at Thana street purasaiwalkam in support of the DMDK alliance party candidate One Mr. Parthasarathy made the following defamatory statement and spoke the defamatory speech as follows
    “அதோட இன்னைக்கு நம்முடைய வேட்பாளர் பொறுத்த வரைக்கும் எளிமையானவர் கூப்பிட்ட குரலுக்கு ஓடோடி வருபவர். நம்முடைய கூட்டணி கட்சி வேட்பாளர் மக்களுக்காக பாடுபட கூடியவர். ஆனால் எதிர்த்து நிற்கிற திராவிட முன்னேற்றதினுடைய வேட்பாளர் அவருடைய சொந்த நலனுக்காக போட்டியிடுகிறார். அவருடைய சொத்துக்களை காப்பாற்ற வேண்டும், இன்னும் சொத்துக்களை விரிவுபடுத்த வேண்டும். ஆகா இருவருக்கும் இது தான் வித்தியாசம். ஆக மக்களுக்கு சேவை செய்கின்ற வேட்பாளர் வேண்டுமா? இல்லது அவருடைய குடும்பத்துக்கு சொத்து சேர்கின்ற வேட்பாளர் வேணுமான்னு தான் இந்த தேர்தலுடைய போட்டி. ஆகவே மக்களுக்கு சேவை செய்கின்ற வேட்பாளருக்கு ஒரு வாய்ப்பை தாருங்கள் தாருங்கள் என்று இருகரம் கூப்பி உங்களை கேட்டுக்கொள்கிறேன். இன்னைக்கு இங்கே போட்டியிடுகின்ற திராவிட முன்னேற்றத்தின் வேட்பாளர் நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினராக இருக்கிறார். இந்த நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினர் நாடாளுமன்ற மேம்பாட்டு நீதியில கிட்ட தட்ட எழுபத்தி ஐந்து சதவிகித நீதி செலவே செய்யல. அப்படினா இவரு எப்படி செயல்பற்றுக்கருன்னு என்பதை எண்ணிப் பாருங்க. அவர் எப்படி மக்களுக்கு சேவை செய்வார். இந்த நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினருக்கு ஒதுக்கப்பட்ட நீதியே மக்களுக்கு என்னென்ன திட்டங்கள் வேண்டும்னு கேட்டு செயல்படுத்தியிருந்தா நல்ல நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினர். மக்களையே பார்ப்பது கிடையாதே தேர்தல் வந்தால் தானே மக்களை பாக்குறாங்க மறுபடியும் அடுத்த தேர்தல் வந்தாதானே மக்களை பாக்குறாங்க அப்பறம் எப்படி மக்களின் குறைகளை கேட்கமுடியும் அந்த குறைகளை தெரிஞ்சிக்க முடியும் அதனால தா அவருடைய நாடுளுமன்ற தொகுதி மேம்பட்டு நிதிய முக்காவாசி செலவுசெய்யலா ஆக இப்படி பட்ட நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினர தேர்த்து எடுத்து இந்த மத்திய சென்னையில எப்படி நன்மை கிடைக்கும்னு எண்ணி பாருங்க அதோட” The Complainant further submits that the above said video has also surfaced all over the social media platforms.
  6. The Complainant further submits that the accused herein had made a false imputation against the complainant defaming his service towards the people of the said constituency that he has not spent his constituency MPLAD funds. [Statement was annexed herewith as Annexure -1] The Complainant further submits that he has sufficient materials and records to prove the factum that during his tenure the 95 % of constituency funds allotted to the respective work has been utilized in an effective manner for the welfare of the people of the constituency.
  7. The complainant submits that the above allegations are without any iota of truth and consequently had caused severe loss of reputation and anguish to him. The complainant submits that he enjoys impeccable and unblemished reputation as a person who has dedicated himself in public service and all these baseless allegations of the accused has caused severe damage to his reputation and there were several enquiries from various people on the issue which had lowered down the complainant’s reputation due to this article. The complainant is a person who has performed well for the best interest of the nation and is a law abiding citizen respecting the laws of the nation
  8. The complainant submits that the Accused has stated the above defametary speech in his campaign on 15.04.2024 at Thana street, Purasaiwalkkam in Chennai Central Constituency District that the Complainant’s only motive to expand his assets for his own welfare and to expand his assets and the assets of his family members, The Complainant has further stated 75% of the allotted constituency funds of the Complainant’s MP constituency are lying unused. The complainant further submits that the Complainant has completed several projects for the welfare of the people using his constituency MPLAD funds allotted to him. The accused further stated in his statement said the complainant has never met the people in his constituency and said at the time of election only he come to his constituency is totally false the complainant had regularly gone and met the people and the constituency people know that
  9. The complainant submits that the accused is liable for the damaging false, malicious statement, knowing very well the same is not true, made against the complainant, which had lowered down his reputation in the society. The Complainant submits that as aforesaid immediately after the statement made by the accused there were several enquiries informing about the damaging statement made by the accused stating that it had lowered down the image of the complainant in their estimation. The accused has acted in a malicious, intentional manner and made a defamatory statement knowing fully well it is false and without ascertaining the veracity the sole intention to defame the complainant and not in good faith and as such the accused is liable for the said defamatory statement.
  10. The Complainant further submits that because of the said defamatory speech delivered by the accused for canvassing the public to secure votes for the alliance Party Member, the reputation of the complainant as well as his political party members are been put into untold hardship and made to suffer reputation loss in the view of people across the globe which has an immense impact on the reputation of the complainant.
  11. The Complainant submits that because of the defamatory speech by the accused, the Complainant and his family members were left to suffer the reputational damage and injury. The Complainant further submits that the accused in no way could claim an exception for his malafide act and he doesn’t enjoy any special privilege before the eye of law.
  12. The complainant submits that he has been put to irreparable loss, harm to reputation and mental agony by the irresponsible false malicious statement of the accused, The accused has with ulterior motive, malafide intention to caused severe loss of reputation and caused a major harm in the reputation of the complainant which was till then enjoyed by the complainant amongst the public and right thinking people of the society.
  13. The complainant submits that the accused knowing fully well it is false with a malafide intention spoke defamatory allegations against the complainant only with an intention to cause disrepute.
  14. The complainant submit that the speech has lowered the estimation of the complainant in the mindset of right thinking people several enquiries were made in this regards to the complainant specifically on seeing this video clips. The reputation of the complainant in their estimation has comedown. One such enquiry was made by D. Viyakumar S/o Dhanapalan residing at No.9/108, 46th Street , SIDCO Nagar, Vilivakkam, Chennai -600 049 told the complainant that he held the complainant in a high esteem and on seeing the video the reputation and esteem of the complainant has come down and the complainant no longer enjoys good reputation in his mind. Several other enquiries, Phone calls and persons met the complainant are expressed their views in the lines mentioned above.
  15. The Complainant submits that the cause of action arose on the accused herein for canvassing the People of Chennai, Central Constituency to secure the votes for his alliance Party Candidate, DMDK by making offending and defamatory speech the reputation of the complainant which was viewed by several number of people of the constituency and also a video of the same went viral in all you tube and all other social media platforms and general public whoever viewed the defamatory video who had shared the link of the said video and expressed their loss of reputation over the complainant and one Mr. D. Viyakumar S/o Dhanapalan residing at No.9/108, 46th Street , SIDCO Nagar, Vilivakkam, Chennai -600 049 who had viewed the defamatory video, had contacted the complainant and expressed his displeasure and loss of reputation on seeing the speech through video towards the allegation made by the accused as against the complainant. Due to the telecast of defamatory statement made by the accused, the general public and his party members had believed the defamatory statement made by the accused spoiled the complainants’ good will and his reputation earned by him through these years. The Complainant submits that since the residence of Mr. D. Viyakumar S/o Dhanapalan located at Villivalkam, the cause of action falls within the limits of V-1 Villivakkam Police Station, hence this Hon’ble Court have the territorial jurisdiction to try this case. In view thereof, this complaint is filed within time and before the proper court, and this Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain this complaint u/S. 200 Cr.P.C and can take cognizance over the complaint for an Offence u/S. 500 IPC against the accused person. In these circumstances, the Complainant humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to receive the complaint u/S. 200 Cr.P.C. and take cognizance of the offence u/S. 500 IPC against the accused and the accused be summoned, tried and punished in accordance with the law for the offence committed by him.

Dated at Chennai on this 17th Day of April 2024

COMPLAINANT COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT

LIST OF WITNESSES
1.Thiru.Dayanidhi Maran, (Male/Age 57 Yrs)
S/o Late Murasoli Maran
No.3, First Avenue,
Boat Club Raja Annamalaipuram,
Chennai-600028

  1. D. Viyakumar S/o Dhanapalan
    Residing at No.9/108, 46th Street ,
    SIDCO Nagar, Vilivakkam,
    Chennai -600 049 Dated at Chennai on this 17th Day April 2024

COMPLAINANT COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT.

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

  1. Pendrive Containing Defamatory Video
  2. Details of usage of MPLAD Funds

Dated at Chennai on this 17th day of April 2024

COMPLAINANT COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT.

IN THE COURT OF HONOURABLE XIII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
AT EGMORE, CHENNAI

C.C.No. of 2024

Thiru.Dayanidhi Maran, (Male/Age 57 Yrs)
S/o Late Thiru. Murasoli Maran
No.3, First Avenue,
Boat Club Raja Annamalaipuram,
Chennai-600028 …Complainant
-Vs-

Edapaddi K.Palanisami (Male/69 Years),
S/o. Karuppa Gounder,
Office at No 226/275, Avvai Shanmugam Salai,
Llyods Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600014
… Accused

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC.199 OF Cr.P.C FOR OFFENCES UNDER SEC. 499 & 500 0F THE I.P.C.

M/s R.VIVEKANANDAN
M.A.VIMAL MOHAN
SENTHIL MURUGAN

COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT
9840026790

IN THE COURT OF HONOURABLE XIII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
AT EGMORE, CHENNAI

C.C.No. of 2024

Thiru.Dayanidhi Maran, (Male/Age 57 Yrs)
S/o Late Thiru. Murasoli Maran
No.3, First Avenue,
Boat Club Raja Annamalaipuram,
Chennai-600028 …Complainant
-Vs-

Edapaddi K.Palanisami (Male/69 Years),
S/o. Karuppa Gounder,
Office at No 226/275, Avvai Shanmugam Salai,
Llyods Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600014
… Accused

DOC NO.
DATE :
DESCRIPTION

M/s R.VIVEKANANDAN
M.A.VIMAL MOHAN
SENTHIL MURUGAN

COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT
9840026790

You may also like...