Thoothukudi anti-Sterlite protest and police firing, May 2018

What the government did

1. 21 May 2018

   Section 144 / 163State government, Tamil NaduShare

   An order under Section 144 CrPC was passed at 10.30 pm on 21 May, the night before the 100th-day march, according to the Madras High Court.

   MoreLess · 5 sources

   Vedanta had asked the High Court for such an order, and on 18 May the court directed the District Collector to consider its representations and pass orders by 21 May. A petitioner told the court that the order covered only the Thoothukudi South and SIPCOT police station limits, that marchers were never told of it, and that there was no proof it was published. The State said it was announced through television, newspapers, megaphones and the Collector's social media. The Chief Minister said thousands had defied prohibitory orders imposed by the district collector. The Aruna Jagadeesan Commission later found that the SP had not specified routes to the permitted venue, the SAV school grounds, which led protesters to violate the order. Prohibitory orders remained in force in the town after the firing

   Legal basis: Section 144 CrPC

   Sources [6][15][9][13][18]

2. 22 May 2018

   FiringPolice, Tamil NaduShare

   Police fired on protesters at and around the Collectorate on 22 May, and fired again on 23 May, when one more person was killed.

   MoreLess · 9 sources

   Whether the firing was provoked is contested. The Chief Minister said protesters attacked the police and torched vehicles and that the police acted in self-defence. In the High Court the State said the firing was ordered by an Executive Magistrate to disperse a riotous mob; the court noted that the officer who ordered it was not the jurisdictional Executive Magistrate and had assumed powers he did not possess. The Aruna Jagadeesan Commission found that the firing was unprovoked and not in private defence, that police shot from hiding at protesters who were far away and fleeing, and that one constable fired 17 rounds. Deaths are counted as 13 by the police and the commission; The News Minute counts 14, including a person who died in October 2018

   • 11 killed in police firing on 22 May, said PTI [2]
   • 13 dead (11 men, 2 women), said IG (South Range) Shailesh Kumar [1]
   • 102 injured, 19 of them severely, said IG (South Range) Shailesh Kumar [1]
   • more than 140 injured, including 70 policemen, said State of Tamil Nadu (Additional Advocate General, Madras High Court) [6]
   • 13 dead, counting Justin Selva Mithesh, who died of lathi-charge injuries, said Aruna Jagadeesan Commission (as reported by The News Minute) [9]
   • 14 dead, including one person who died in October 2018, said The News Minute [9]
   • at least 33 injured by bullets, said Down To Earth [11]
   • 17 rounds fired by one constable, Sudalaikannu, said Aruna Jagadeesan Commission (as reported by Deccan Herald) [10]

   Sources [1][2][6][9][10][11][12][5][16]

3. 23 May 2018

   DetentionPolice, Tamil NaduShare

   Police arrested people over the violence from 23 May.

   MoreLess · 4 sources

   Collector Sandeep Nanduri said 65 people had been arrested and remanded and 68 more would be produced before a magistrate for damaging public property; the Tribune reported that 65 of those arrested were granted bail later that day. In the High Court the State said 94 people were taken for interrogation, 65 of them were arrested on 23 May and remanded the next day, and 244 people had been arrested by 14 June. Rights activists alleged that hundreds of young people were held in illegal custody; SP Murali Rambha denied this. The IG said vehicles worth Rs 1.27 crore were burnt

   • 65 arrested and remanded for violence (68 more to be produced before a magistrate), said Collector Sandeep Nanduri [1]
   • 145 taken into custody and remanded, said SP Murali Rambha [14]
   • 243 cases registered in the district up to 14 June 2018, said State of Tamil Nadu (Additional Advocate General, Madras High Court) [6]
   • 244 persons arrested up to 14 June 2018, said State of Tamil Nadu (Additional Advocate General, Madras High Court) [6]
   • Rs 1.27 crore value of vehicles burnt, said IG (South Range) Shailesh Kumar [1]

   Sources [1][6][14][18]

4. 23 May 2018

   Internet shutdownState government, Tamil NaduShare

   The Tamil Nadu government suspended internet services in Thoothukudi, Tirunelveli and Kanyakumari districts from 23 May until 27 May.

   MoreLess · 5 sources

   The order said provocative messages with half truths on social media had led to the gathering of about 20,000 people, and that the internet had to be stopped to prevent such rumours. After the Madras High Court asked the State on 25 May why the two other districts were covered, services were restored in Tirunelveli and Kanyakumari while the suspension in Thoothukudi continued. The State told the court that the Home Secretary revoked the order after two days for those districts and two days later for Thoothukudi. In August 2018 the court directed the Home Secretary to form a committee to apply international standards when using the 2017 suspension rules

   Legal basis: Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules, 2017, Rule 2(1); G.O. No. 679

   Sources [6][13][2][24][1]

5. 23 May 2018

   Commission of inquiryState government, Tamil NaduShare

   The state government appointed retired Madras High Court judge Aruna Jagadeesan as a one-member commission of inquiry into the police firing, a day after it.

   MoreLess · 6 sources

   The commission gave an interim report in May 2021 and its final report to Chief Minister M.K. Stalin on 18 May 2022; the report, about 3,000 pages, was tabled in the Assembly on 18 October 2022. It found the firing unprovoked, recommended departmental action, without prejudice to criminal action, against 17 police personnel including IG Shailesh Kumar Yadav, DIG Kapil Kumar C. Saratkar and SP P. Mahendran, and recommended departmental action against Collector N. Venkatesh and three deputy tahsildars. It called the then Chief Minister's statement that he learnt of the firing from television incorrect, and recommended Rs 50 lakh compensation for each death

   Legal basis: Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (as reported by The Wire)

   • 17 police personnel the commission recommended action against, said Aruna Jagadeesan Commission (as reported by The News Minute) [9]
   • Rs 50 lakh total compensation recommended for each death (Rs 20 lakh already paid), said Aruna Jagadeesan Commission (as reported by The News Minute) [9]

   Sources [15][11][9][10][12][5]

6. 28 May 2018

   OtherState government, Tamil NaduShare

   Plant closure: by G.O.

   MoreLess · 3 sources

   Ms. No. 72 of the Environment and Forests Department, the Tamil Nadu government endorsed the Pollution Control Board's closure directions of 23 May and directed the Board to seal the unit and close the plant permanently. A committee set up by the National Green Tribunal reported in November 2018 that the closure orders could not be sustained because the company had not been given notice or a hearing, and the Tribunal set aside the orders on 15 December 2018. The Supreme Court set aside the Tribunal's judgment in February 2019 for lack of jurisdiction; the Madras High Court upheld the closure in August 2020, and the Supreme Court dismissed Vedanta's petitions against that judgment in February 2024

   Legal basis: Section 18(1)(b), Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974

   Court: The National Green Tribunal set aside the closure orders on 15 December 2018; the Supreme Court set that judgment aside on 18 February 2019, holding that the appeal to the Tribunal was not maintainable. [7]

   Court: The Supreme Court dismissed Vedanta's petitions against the Madras High Court judgment of 18 August 2020, which had upheld the closure. [8]

   Sources [7][8][4]

7. 14 Aug 2018

   OtherCourtShare

   CBI probe: the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court transferred the investigation in two SIPCOT police station cases to the CBI and directed it to register cases on complaints against officials and police and finish within four months.

   MoreLess · 2 sources

   The court said it failed to understand how not a single case, not even under Section 174 CrPC, had been registered on behalf of the injured or the families of the dead. In November 2018 the CBI registered a case against unidentified Tamil Nadu police personnel and revenue officials for criminal conspiracy, criminal intimidation and disobeying law with intent to cause injury.

   Sources [6][3]

8. Oct 2022

   OtherState government, Tamil NaduShare

   Action on the commission report: after the report was tabled, the Tamil Nadu government suspended four policemen, among them constable Sudalaikannu, and began penalty proceedings against former Collector N.

   MoreLess · 4 sources

   Venkatesh. Reports differ on whether the senior officer suspended was a DSP or an inspector. The Chief Minister told the Assembly that disciplinary action had been started against the IG, DIG, SP and other officers named in the report, and the government announced an additional Rs 5 lakh for each of the 13 families

   • 4 policemen suspended, said Deccan Herald [20]
   • Rs 5 lakh additional compensation for each family of the dead, said Government of Tamil Nadu (as reported by Deccan Herald) [21]

   Sources [20][11][21][22]

Outcome

The state ordered Sterlite Copper shut on 28 May 2018, and the closure was upheld by the Madras High Court in 2020 and the Supreme Court in 2024. The CBI took over the investigation after a Madras High Court order and registered a case in November 2018 against unnamed police and revenue officials. The Aruna Jagadeesan Commission reported that police fired unprovoked and recommended action against 17 police personnel and the then Collector; the DMK government began disciplinary action in October 2022.

Background

Who governed at the start of the protest. Each action above counts for the party in power where and when it happened.

Centre government

BJPNDA, Narendra Modi, Prime Minister

State government

AIADMK in Tamil Nadu, Edappadi K. Palaniswami, Chief Minister

Places

Thoothukudi, Tirunelveli, Kanyakumari

Cause

Opposition to the expansion and operation of the Sterlite Copper smelter

Organisers

Local residents and anti-Sterlite groups

Scale

Thousands marched on the Thoothukudi Collectorate on 22 May 2018, the 100th day of the protest; 13 dead and 102 injured according to the police

What they said

Words in quote marks were matched in the source. Everything else is a summary; open the source for the exact words. Each statement says whether the speaker's party was in power or in opposition at the time.

Sources

1. 1Anti-Sterlite protests: 13 dead, 102 injured in Thoothukudi; electricity supply to Sterlite Industries cut off | As it happenedIndia TV, 24 May 2018T5 SecondaryArchived 24 May 2018
2. 2After fresh violence, internet services suspended in Tuticorin, top cop shiftedPTI via Deccan Chronicle, 24 May 2018T5 SecondaryArchived 24 May 2018
3. 3Thoothukudi killings: CBI registers case against police and revenue department officialsScroll.in, 29 Nov 2018T5 SecondaryArchived 30 Nov 2018
4. 4Sterlite Copper row: Activists question neutrality of NGT panel that found closure of plant illegalScroll.in, S Senthalir, 29 Nov 2018T4 ReportArchived 29 Nov 2018
5. 5Probe Panel on Thoothukudi Firing Says Police Shot At 'Fleeing Protesters Unprovoked': ReportThe Wire, 19 Aug 2022T5 SecondaryArchived 19 Aug 2022
6. 6K. Kathiresan v. State of Tamil Nadu, W.P.(MD) No. 11391 of 2018 and batch (Madurai Bench), order of 14 August 2018Madras High Court (via Indian Kanoon), Justices C.T. Selvam and A.M. Basheer Ahamed, 14 Aug 2018T2 Court
7. 7Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board v. Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd., judgment of 18 February 2019Supreme Court of India (via Indian Kanoon), Justices R.F. Nariman and Navin Sinha, 18 Feb 2019T2 CourtArchived 19 Feb 2019
8. 8Vedanta Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 INSC 175, judgment of 29 February 2024Supreme Court of India (via Indian Kanoon), Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud (for the Bench), 29 Feb 2024T2 Court
9. 9Aruna Jagadeesan Commission holds 17 cops responsible for Thoothukudi firingThe News Minute, Akchayaa Rajkumar and Azeefa Fathima, 18 Oct 2022T4 ReportArchived 15 Apr 2024
10. 10Act against 17 policemen for Thoothukudi police firing: CommissionDeccan Herald, ETB Sivapriyan, 18 Oct 2022T4 Report
11. 11Thoothukudi firing: Inquiry report finds police, revenue officials responsible for 13 deathsDown To Earth, Anil Ashwani Sharma, 28 Oct 2022T4 ReportArchived 6 Nov 2024
12. 12Thoothukudi firing: Aruna Jagadeesan panel finds fault with policeDT Next, 18 Oct 2022T5 Secondary
13. 13As Thoothukudi simmers, TN asks internet providers to cut data services in 3 districtsThe News Minute, Shilpa S Ranipeta, 23 May 2018T4 ReportArchived 5 Aug 2025
14. 14Reports of illegal detention hit ThoothukudiDeccan Herald, ETB Sivapriyan, 26 May 2018T4 Report
15. 15Retired judge to probe Thoothukudi police firingDeccan Herald, 23 May 2018T5 SecondaryArchived 28 Oct 2020
16. 16TN CM justifies Thoothukudi police firing as ‘natural’ reaction, says not pre-plannedThe News Minute, 24 May 2018T5 SecondaryArchived 15 Oct 2024
17. 17Thootukudi Violence Caused By Anti-Social Elements: PalaniswamyIANS via Sakshi Post, 24 May 2018T5 Secondary
18. 18Tuticorin firing toll 13, Rajnath appeals for peaceThe Tribune, 24 May 2018T5 Secondary
19. 19Rahul Gandhi on X: police shooting in the #SterliteProtestX (Twitter), Rahul Gandhi, 22 May 2018T1 RecordArchived 3 Mar 2025
20. 20Thoothukudi firing report: Tamil Nadu acts against policemen and IAS officerDeccan Herald, ETB Sivapriyan, 24 Oct 2022T4 Report
21. 21Thoothukudi police firing victims to get additional compensationDeccan Herald, ETB Sivapriyan, 16 Nov 2022T4 Report
22. 22Guilty will be punished: Stalin on Thoothukudi police firingDT Next, 19 Oct 2022T5 Secondary
23. 23Anti-Sterlite Protests: Stalin Detained Outside SecretariatOutlook, 24 May 2018T5 Secondary
24. 24Internet services restored in Tirunelveli and Kanyakumari, no decision on Thoothukudi yetThe News Minute, 25 May 2018T5 Secondary

Similar precedents

Faded actions are ones this precedent does not share.