✦ High Court of India · 20 Mar 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 20 Mar 2025

Court

High Court of India

Decided

20 Mar 2025

Bench

Not available

Length

1,096 words

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure §482 Indian Penal Code §153 Indian Penal Code §153A Indian Penal Code §153A and 505(1)Indian Penal Code §5 Indian Penal Code §505(1)Indian Penal Code

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-03-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYANCRL OP NO. 23375 of 2024ANDCRL MP NO. 13240 OF 2024 B.John PandiyanS/o.Benjamin Siva Rajendran, D.No.5/565-A, Anna North Street, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli. Petitioner(s) VsState Of Tamilnadu, rep.byThe Inspector Of Police, Coimbatore City P.S, Variety Hall Road, Coimbatore.(Cr.No.253/2020). Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, to call for the records and quash the final report in CC.No.2028 of 2021 in Crime no.253 of 2020 dated 20.03.2020 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-V, Coimbatore.For Petitioner(s): M/s.S.KumarFor Respondent(s): R.Vinoth Raja, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ORDERThis Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking to call for the records and quash the final report in CC.No.2028 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-V, Coimbatore.2.The respondent registered an FIR in Crime no.253 of 2020 dated 20.03.2020 for the offences under Sections 153A and 505(1)(c) of IPC alleging that the petitioner delivered a speech in a Public Meeting held on 14.03.2020 at Raja Street, Coimbatore. In the said meeting he had spoken as follows:@kj;jpa murh';fk; mwptpj;Js;s CAA, NPR, NRC ia vjph;f;fpd;w xnu rKjhak; K!;yPk; rKjhak; jhd;. 1992?y; Fz;L tr;r ghak;kh mtSf;F kl;Lk; jhd; itf;f bjhpa[kh> eh';fs; itj;jhy; btof;fhjh> ehd; rz;ilf;F tutpy;iy/ rz;ilf;F te;jhy; vtdh ,Ue;jhYk; tplkhl;nld;/ 1992 ny g[ul;rp btoj;jpUf;Fk; vd;W brhd;dhy; vtdhtJ c';fis rPz;Lthdh vd;gij eP';fs; vz;zpg; ghh;f;f ntz;Lk/////// gzpe;J thH;tJ thH;f;if my;y. Jzpe;J thG';fs; vjw;Fk; jd;khdj;ij tpl;Lf; bfhLf;f 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TlhJ/ vy;nyhUk; xd;dh nruDk;y> tPl;il g[{l;of;fpl;L cs;ns ngha; ma;aa;nah ekf;F vJf;Fd;D cs;s nghapl;lh mg;g Fj;j jhd; bra;thd;/ vjph;j;J ghh; vjph;j;J epy;. tPu rpth$p ths; bfhz;L vg;go Ml;rpia gpoj;jhh; vd;W tuyhW ,Uf;fpwJ my;yth> vL [email protected] completion of the investigation, the respondent filed a final report and the same has been taken cognizance in CC No.2028 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate V, Coimbatore, for the offences under Sections 153A and 505(1)(c) of IPC.Section 153(A) of IPC reads as under:“153A. Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.-(1)Whoever-(a)by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, or3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (b) commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity, or(c) organizes any exercise, movement, drill or other similar activity intending that the participants in such activity shall use or be trained to use criminal force or violence or knowing it to be likely that the participants in such activity will use or be trained to use criminal force or violence, or participates in such activity intending to use or be trained to use criminal force or violence or knowing it to be likely that the participants in such activity will use or be trained to use criminal force or violence, against any religious, racial, language or regional group or caste or community and such activity for any reason whatsoever causes or is likely to cause fear or alarm or a feeling of insecurity amongst members of such religious, racial, language or regional group or caste or community,shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.Offence committed in place of worship, etc.(2) Whoever commits an offence specified in sub-section (1) in any place of worship or in any assembly engaged in the performance of religious worship or religious ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine.4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Thus it is clear that the intention to cause disorder or incite people to violence is the sine qua non of the ofence under Section 153A of IPC and the respondent has to prove prima facie the existence of mens rea on the part of the accused. 4. It appears that the respondent had picked and chosen few sentences of the speech and failed to understand the sum and substance of the whole speech and registered the FIR. The matter complained of within the ambit of Section 153-A must be read as a whole. One cannot rely on strongly worded and isolated passages for proving the charge nor indeed can one take a sentence here and a sentence there and connect them by a meticulous process of inferential reasoning as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Manzar Sayeed Khan Vs. State of Maharastra (2007)5 SCC1. Therefore, the offence under Section 153A of IPC is not attracted against the petitioner. Insofar as the offence under Section 505(1)(c) of IPC is concerned, it is relevant to extract the provision under 505(1)(C) IPC, which reads as under:(1)Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement, rumour or report,— (a) .... ..... ......5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (b) ..... ...... .......(c) with intent to incite, or which is likely to incite, any class or community of persons to commit any offence against any other class or community,shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.”Thus it is clear that in order to attract the offence under Section 505(1)(c) of IPC, the mens rea is essential. There must be an intention to incite, or which is likely to incite any class or community of persons to commit any offence against any other class or community.5.On a care perusal of the speech spoken by the petitioner, this Court finds that mens rea is absent. Further, the petitioner never addressed his speech with an intention to cause prejudice to the maintenance of harmony of different religious group and to disturb public tranquility. Further, there is no apparent mens rea to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between two classes of people. Therefore, both the offences are not attracted as against the petitioner to proceed further. 6.In view of the above, the entire proceedings cannot be sustained against the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis allowed and the proceedings in CC.No.2028 of 2021 dated 23.09.2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-V, Coimbatore are hereby quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.20-03-2025dnTo1. State Of Tamilnadu Rep.ByThe Inspector Of Police, Coimbatore City P.S, Variety Hall Road, Coimbatore.Cr.No.253/2020.2.The Public Prosecutor,High Court, Madras.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN.J.,dnCRL OP NO.23375 OF 202420.03.20258/8

Find similar cases Start drafting free

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments

More cases under Code of Criminal Procedure