Madras HC asks why BJP minister Shobha Karandlaje linked Tamil Nadu with Rameshwaram Cafe blast

The Madras High Court on Wednesday questioned Union Minister of State (Mos) Shobha Karandlaje on her public claim that the bombers involved in Bengaluru’s Rameshwararm Cafe blast had been trained in Tamil Nadu even before the National Investigation Agency (NIA) conducted searches in Chennai.

Justice G Jayachandran made the remarks while hearing Karandlaje’s petition to quash the First Information Report (FIR) filed against her by Tamil Nadu’s Madurai cyber crime police on March 20.

“You (minister) made the statement even before the NIA (National Investigation Agency) held searches in Chennai,” Justice Jayachandran said as quoted by BarandBench. “It means you are aware of the facts, you know who the trained persons are, who trained them, and what they have done. If you have got some information about the offence, you should have disclosed it to the police. As a responsible citizen, the minister has not done it.”

In a video which had gone viral, the Union MoS for labour and employment allegedly blamed “people from Tamil Nadu” for the March 1 blast at the Rameshwaram Cafe in Bengaluru. “People from Tamil Nadu come here, get trained there, and plant bombs here. They placed a bomb in the cafe,” she said, alleging that the bomber was trained in Tamil Nadu’s Krishnagiri forests right under chief minister MK Stalin’s nose.

The ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) of Tamil Nadu had complained to the Election Commission of India (ECI) while the model code of conduct was on in view of the Lok Sabha elections which concluded in June. Karandlaje later on March 19 apologised for her remark.

In her petition, Karandlaje said that her intention was to raise concerns about internal security and that she didn’t pit Kannadigas against Tamils which she alleged was the imagination of the complainant.

While the petitioner’s advocate R Hariprasad said that the case was politically motivated, the Tamil Nadu government’s advocate KMD Muhilan urged the court to watch the video.

The justice did not grant interim relief to the petitioner as sought. The court adjourned the hearing to July 12.