The Madras High Court has issued a stay order halting the investigation into a Coimbatore school's decision to take students to witness Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Road Show held on March 18, 2024, in Coimbatore.

Justice G Jayachandran has temporarily halted the investigation until further notice and postponed the hearing of the case to April 24. On this date, the state is required to submit a comprehensive counterargument.

The court had earlier raised doubts about the justification behind launching criminal proceedings against the school management solely for arranging a visit to the roadshow for the students. It emphasized that law enforcement shouldn't hastily file criminal charges against school authorities based solely on media coverage. Additionally, the court pointed out that such legal actions against schools for such occurrences could significantly discourage children from participating in political events in the future.

The court also questioned the relevance of Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 in the current case.

During Monday's proceedings, Advocate General PS Raman informed the court that Section 75 of the Act could be applicable even in situations where there was a risk of harm to the children. He pointed out discrepancies in the school's claim that the children were taken to the roadshow only at 4:30 pm, presenting evidence that they were present during Prime Minister Modi's arrival at 6 pm. Additionally, he noted that, despite a stampede occurring during the roadshow, the students remained unharmed.

Raman further argued that the Model Code of Conduct, as issued by the Election Commission of India, explicitly prohibited the participation of students in any form of political rallies. Therefore, he contended that the presence of school children at the Prime Minister's rally could not be justified under any circumstances.

The arguments were presented in the headmistress's petition seeking to dismiss the FIR filed against the school under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act. The headmistress contended that the complaint was baseless and motivated by a vindictive agenda aimed at harassing the school. She emphasized that the school had taken all necessary precautions to ensure the safe attendance of students, with proper arrangements made for them to be accompanied by their parents. Furthermore, it was asserted that the complaint did not meet the criteria for offenses under the Juvenile Justice Act.

Case Title: M/s S Pukal Vadivu v State

Case No: Crl OP 8089 of 2024