Madras High Court closes case after protesting Samsung factory workers are released

The arrests were made amid protests by hundreds of Samsung's factory workers for the recognition of a labour union, improved working hours, and better pay.
Madras High Court
Madras High Court
Published on
2 min read

The Madras High Court on Wednesday closed a habeas corpus petition filed in the wake of the arrests of eight workers who were protesting near Chennai against smartphone manufacturer Samsung [Muthukumar v. State and ors].

A Bench of Justices PB Balaji and G Arul Murugan was informed that these workers have already been released. Since a magistrate in Sriperumbudur had refused to remand the eight workers to judicial custody, they were released hours after their arrest.

It noted that the High Court (in another case) had already granted sufficient safeguards to ensure that the labourers can continue peaceful protests, provided they do not obstruct those who were willing to continue work at the Samsung factory outlet in Sriperumbudur (Kancheepuram district).

"Since already necessary safeguards have been made and also the employees have been allowed to go on strike peacefully as set out in the orders, as we find that from the instructions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that there is no illegal custody as projected by the petitioner, we feel no further orders are required in the Habeas Corpus Petition," the Court observed in the October 9 order.

Justice PB Balaji, Justice G Arul Murugan
Justice PB Balaji, Justice G Arul Murugan

The eight workers - Ellan, Rajaboopathy, Ashiq Ahamed, Balaji, Shanmugam, Mohanraj, Anandan and Sivanesan - were arrested by the Tamil Nadu Police on October 8 at around 5 PM.

The arrests were made amid protests by hundreds of Samsung's factory workers for the recognition of a labour union, improved working hours, and better pay.

The eight workers were booked on charges under Sections 191(2) [rioting], 296(b) [obscene acts/songs in public spaces], 115(2) [causing hurt], 132 [assault or use of criminal force to deter public servant from performing duty], 121(1) [hurting public servant to deter discharge of duty], 351(2) [criminal intimidation] and 49 [abetment of a crime] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

A habeas corpus plea was then moved by one Muthukumar to secure the release of these eight workers.

Representing the petitioner, Advocate NGR Prasad told the High Court that the police were interfering with the workers' peaceful protests and that they were illegally detained.

The State, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) A Damodharan, said that these workers are no longer under arrest. He informed the Court that a criminal case was registered on Tuesday against several workers since there was a law and order issue.

He said that the eight workers were set free and have since appeared before the magistrate to furnish sureties for their release. As such, the APP said that there was no illegal detention in this case as alleged in the petition.

In view of this, the Court proceeded to close the habeas corpus case.

Advocate R Thirumoorthy also appeared for the petitioner.

[Read Order]

Attachment
PDF
Muthukumar v. State and ors.pdf
Preview
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com