The Madras High Court on Wednesday adjourned the hearing of public interest litigations (PILs) seeking to transfer the investigation of the Kallakurichi hooch tragedy to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The court also permitted the state to file a status report on the ongoing investigation.The first division bench, comprising acting Chief Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq, heard the PILs filed by AIADMK and PMK legislators, who demanded that the probe be transferred from the CB-CID in the state to the central investigative agency.
The tragic incident occurred on June 19, when at least 61 people from the Karunapuram area of Kallakurichi district died after consuming ‘paper arrack’ mixed with methanol. Many others are still receiving treatment at various local hospitals.
During the hearing, Advocate General (AG) PS Raman informed the court that a status report on the actions taken to prevent the distillation and sale of illicit arrack was being prepared and requested additional time to submit it.
Senior counsel NL Rajah, representing PMK, argued that the investigation must commence immediately to ensure that critical evidence is collected during the “golden hours” following the incident.
AG PS Raman countered by stating that CB-CID officials were already investigating the case, had arrested the key accused, and discovered the source of the methanol mixed with the hooch.
Senior counsel V Raghavachari, representing AIADMK, contended that the investigation should be transferred to the CBI. He pointed out that the accused had been acquitted in most of the past cases lodged against them by the CB-CID concerning illicit arrack.
After considering all submissions, the bench scheduled the next hearing for July 3.
The PILs were filed by advocate IS Inbadurai on behalf of the AIADMK and advocate K Balu of the PMK, both seeking to transfer the investigation to the CBI. Balu also requested the constitution of a special investigation team (SIT) to apprehend all accused. Since both PILs sought similar interventions, the court decided to hear them together.
