Any speech which disrespects another citizen on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community is forbidden and becomes punishable under Indian Penal Code and various other laws. The responsibility attached to free speech should not be forgotten,” the justice N Anand Venkatesh cautioned while dismissing a batch of petitions filed by Thirumurugan Gandhi.
There are series of cases booked against Thirumurugan Gandhi, founder-coordinator, May 17 Movement for having delivered hate speeches against the Centre, the State Government as well the judiciary.
After extracting the speeches reportedly delivered by the petitioner at different platforms, the judge said, they show the petitioner “has a clear tendency to get into a vitriolic diatribe whenever he picks up the microphone… The speeches are pregnant with hate spewed against a particular community which is attacked in a vituperative, opprobrious and slanderous manner.”
He pointed out that the petitioner through his speeches had repeatedly attempted to portray as if Tamil Nadu did not belong to India and that every organ was attempting to destroy the State. He has used the choicest of words against the Supreme Court and the High Court and alleged caste-based domination in the judiciary.
“The petitioner must understand that these hate speeches will in no way help or protect the welfare and interest of this State. Spewing venom against a particular community is not going to help the downtrodden come up in the society and become a part of the mainstream. On the other hand, it will only sow the seeds of hatred among communities,” the judge advised.
Agreeing that free speech was the foundation of a democratic society, the judge said, “Restraints on this right have been zealously watched by courts. However, the Constitution itself prescribes restrictions of the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(2). It enables the legislature to impose restrictions upon the freedom of speech and expression on eight grounds including sovereignty and integrity of India, public order, decency and incitement to an offence”.
The Madras High Court directed the police to investigate thoroughly and ascertain if Thirumurugan Gandhi is the face of a larger net.
Madras High Court Turns Down Plea to Quash FIRs Against Pro-Tamil Activist in Cases of 'Hate Speech'
Justice Anand Venkatesh held that the speeches made by the petitioner will certainly promote a feeling of enmity, hatred and ill will between different religious groups and communities.
Chennai The Madras High Court Tuesday dismissed petitions by pro-Tamil activist Thirumurugan Gandhi seeking to quash eight FIRs registered against him for alleged hate speeches, observing that the Constitution doesn't permit such utterances in the name of freedom of speech and expression.
Justice Anand Venkatesh held that the speeches made by the petitioner will certainly promote a feeling of enmity, hatred and ill will between different religious groups and communities.
The speeches also have shades of fissiparous and separatist tendencies, which will seriously affect the unity of the nation and have an impact on the growth and development of Tamil Nadu, he said.
The judge said it is also important for police to investigate thoroughly and see if "there is a larger net and whether the petitioner is only the face of it".
Gandhi, founder of the "May 17 Organisation", faces a slew of cases over his comments against the Centre and the Tamil Nadu government.
"This court is of the considered view there are prima facie materials available against the petitioner and there are absolutely no grounds to interfere with the investigation conducted by the respondent, police, at this stage," he said dismissing the petitions.
In his order, the judge noted that free speech was the foundation of a democratic society and restraints on this right have been jealously watched by courts.
Justice Venkatesh said the Constitution itself prescribes restrictions of the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(2).
It enables the legislature to impose restrictions upon the freedom of speech and expression on eight grounds, including the country's sovereignty and integrity, public order, decency and incitement to an offence, he said in the order.
The judge said any leader or a speaker who takes to a public platform or expresses through social media, must bear it in mind that the country's Constitution does not permit hate speech in the name of freedom of speech and expression.The responsibility attached to free speech should not be forgotten.
Hate speeches create discord among various ethnic and religious communities, he said, adding that any speech which disrespects another citizen on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community is forbidden and punishable under the Indian Penal Code and various other laws, he said.
Referring to the allegations made against the petitioner in the complaints and extracted in the FIRs, the judge said a careful reading of them show that "the petitioner has a clear tendency to get into a vitriolic diatribe whenever he picks up the microphone."
Citing extracted portions of the petitioner's speeches, Justice Venkatesh said they were pregnant with hate spewed against a particular community which is attacked in a "vituperative, opprobrious and slanderous manner".
"The petitioner is repeatedly attempting to portray as if Tamil Nadu does not belong to India and that every organ is attempting to destroy this state. He has also used the choicest of words against the high court and Supreme Court," the judge said in his order.
He referred to submissions by the state public prosecutor that the petitioner had been giving hate speeches which induces negative thoughts in the minds of the public regarding various policies, projects and welfare schemes of the state and Central governments.
On the claim by Gandhi that he was running the organisation to protect the welfare and interest of Tamil Nadu, Justice Venkatesh said his speeches were nowhere near these avowed objects.
Spewing venom against a particular community is not going to help the downtrodden come up in the society and become a part of the main stream."On the other hand, it will only show the seeds of hatred among communities," he added.
