Chennai: The Madras High Court today allowed a criminal revision petition filed by Sri Lankan Minister Douglas Devananda and directed him to appear through video conferencing at the Office of the High Commissioner of India at Colombo as and when required in a criminal case pending against him in a sessions court here.
“The apprehension of the petitioner as a person who have suffered 13 attacks cannot be easily ignored,” said Justice C.T.Selvam who set aside the lower court's October 18, 2012 order dismissing his pleas for dispensing with his personal appearance and to quash the NBW passed against him.
While recalling the summons issued to Devananda who is charged with murder offence, the Judge directed him to file an affidavit notarized in Sri Lanka undertaking therein not to dispute his identity.
“We have before us the affidavit of the petitioner, which informs that he would make himself available for video conferencing at the office of the High Commissioner of India at Colombo, Sri lanka, whenever necessary,” the judge said, while recording the undertaking submitted by Douglas that as and when his presence is felt necessary, he would appear before the concerned court.
“Of course, it is necessary for the petitioner to appear before the trial court when such court considers the same absolute and necessary,” the judge said.
The judge directed Douglas to appear before the trial court when called upon to do so and at such instance, it is the duty of the state to give him appropriate protection.
The petitioner had challenged the order of the lower court refusing to recall the NBW and accept his appearance through videoconferencing in the case which relates to the murder of one Thirunavukkarasu in a shootout at Choolaimedu in November 1986.
Devananda, then a member of Eelam People's Revolutionary Front in Lanka, and five others were charged with opening fire with automatic weapons at locals, in which Thirunavukkarasu and four others were injured. Thirunavukkarasu later died.
Devananda and others were charged with murder, attempt to murder, rioting and unlawful assembly in the case.
The court had issued proclamation and warrant treating him as absconding accused in 1994 on a memo filed by the public prosecutor.
The court directed him to appear before the trial court and file a petition to recall the NBW, following which he filed a petition before the IV Additional Sessions Judge to recall the NBW and to dispense with his personal appearance which was dismissed. Subsequently, he filed the criminal revision petition.
