The case stems from a registered inter-district love marriage between a local youth and a woman from Theni, opposed by the woman’s family.
Published Jun 17, 2025 | 12:56 PM ⚊ Updated Jun 17, 2025 | 1:08 PM
ADGP HM Jayaram.
Synopsis: The Tamil Nadu Home Secretary has issued orders to suspend ADGP HM Jayaram in connection with a kidnapping case. The suspension comes after the Madras High Court ordered his arrest for allegedly being complicit in the abduction of a minor boy.
The Tamil Nadu Home Secretary has issued orders to suspend Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) HM Jayaram on Tuesday, 17 June, in connection with a kidnapping case.
Reports suggest that he has been relieved of duties in a situation where an inquiry was to be conducted at the Superintendent of Police (SP) office in Tiruvallur district.
The suspension comes after he was arrested following the Madras High Court’s order for his arrest for allegedly being complicit in the abduction of a minor boy in a love affair case. Meanwhile, Jayaram filed an appeal against the order in the Supreme Court.
On Monday, the high court heard the anticipatory bail plea of Puratchi Bharatam Party President and KV Kuppam MLA Poovai Jaganmurthy in connection with the alleged abduction of a 17-year-old boy in Kalambakkam in the Thiruvallur district.
The case stems from a registered inter-district love marriage between a local youth and a woman from Theni, opposed by the woman’s family.
Allegedly, in retaliation, the boy’s younger brother was kidnapped with the help of hired men. A complaint accused Jaganmurthy of orchestrating the abduction using political clout. Five individuals, including the woman’s father, have already been arrested.
Police further claimed that a monetary transaction was linked to the abduction and that Jayaram was also involved. Amid rising pressure, Jaganmurthy, who had reportedly gone into hiding, filed for anticipatory bail, denying all charges and seeking an urgent hearing.
Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala permitted an emergency hearing, assigning the case to Justice P Velmurugan. In court, senior counsel Prabhakaran represented Jaganmurthy, while Additional Public Prosecutor Damodaran appeared for the state.
The prosecution presented evidence, including CCTV footage and witness statements, suggesting the abducted boy was taken to a hotel and implicating both Jaganmurthy and Jayaram.
Justice Velmurugan made scathing remarks during the hearing. He questioned Jaganmurthy about the margin of his electoral victory, reminding him that elected representatives were meant to serve the people, not conduct illegal “kattapanchayats” (vigilante justice).
“Being elected doesn’t give you licence to break the law,” the judge stated.
The defence denied the use of hired goons and argued that Jayaram was being falsely implicated due to departmental rivalries.
However, the prosecution countered that Jayaram had communicated directly with Jaganmurthy and was named in testimonies by lawyer Sarath Kumar and ex-police officer Maheswari.
The court instructed the police to proceed with Jayaram’s arrest and demanded a thorough investigation, including witness depositions and a full inquiry report.
Rebuking attempts to politicise the issue or intimidate the judiciary, the judge declared: “Even if a hundred thousand people stand in court, if there is wrongdoing, action will be taken.”
The court firmly stated that public servants who misuse power and betray public trust will face consequences. The next hearing, including the decision on Jaganmurthy’s anticipatory bail, has been scheduled for 26 June, with the police directed to submit a detailed report before then.
(With inputs from Subash Chandra Bose.)
