CRL.O.P.No.7840 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3991, 3992, 3993
Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.05.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
CRL.O.P.No.7840 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3991, 3992, 3993 & 4000 of 2020 Crl.O.P.Nos.7842 & 7843 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3998 & 3999 of 2020 Crl.O.P.No.7841 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3994, 3995, 3996 & 3997 of 2020
Crl.O.P.No.7840 of 2020
Thiru.Dayanidhi Maran ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The State, By the Sub Inspector of Police, Thudiyalur Police Station, Coimbatore 641 034.
2.Sekar ... Respondents
Crl.O.P.Nos.7842 & 7843 of 2020
T.R.Balu ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The State, Represented by the Inspector of Police, Coimbatore Thudiyalur Police Station, Coimbatore 641 034.
2.Thiru.Anandhakumar, Sub Inspector of Police, Thudiyalur Police Station, Coimbatore 641 034.
3.K.Sekar. ... Respondents
1/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
Crl.O.P.No.7841 of 2020
Thiru.Dayanidhi Maran ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The State, By the Inspector of Police, Coimbatore City Police Station, Variety Hall Road, Coimbatore 641 001.
2.Mr.Jeganathan ... Respondents
PRAYER in Crl.O.P.No.7840 of 2020: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying, to call for the records relating to the proceedings in Crime No.1415 of 2020 on the file of the Sub Inspector of Police, Thudiyalur Police Station, Coimbatore 641 034 and quash the same and allow this Criminal Original Petition.
PRAYER in Crl.O.P.No.7842 of 2020: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying, to call for the records relating to FIR No.1415 of 2020 dated 19.05.2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Coimbatore Thudialur Police Station, Coimbatore, Coimbatore 641 034 and quash the same.
PRAYER in Crl.O.P.No.7843 of 2020: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of the petitioner being arrested by the 1st respondent in connected to FIR No.1415 of 2020 on the file of the 1st respondent.
PRAYER in Crl.O.P.No.7841 of 2020: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying, to call for the records relating to the proceedings in Crime No.643 of 2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Coimbatore City Police Station, Variety Hall Road, Coimbatore 641 001 and quash the same and allow this Criminal Original Petition.
Crl.O.P.No.7840 of 2020 For Petitioner : Mr.Ar.L.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel for Mr.J.Ravindran
2/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
For R1 : Mr.A.Natarajan State Public Prosecutor Assisted by Mr.S.Karthikeyan, Additional Public Prosecutor
Crl.O.P.Nos.7842 & 7843 of 2020 For Petitioner : Mr.P.Wilson Associates, Senior Counsel
For R1 & R2 : Mr.A.Natarajan State Public Prosecutor Assisted by Mr.S.Karthikeyan, Additional Public Prosecutor
Crl.O.P.No.7841 of 2020 For Petitioner : Mr.N.R.Elango Senior Counsel for Mr.J.Ravindran
For R1 : Mr.A.Natarajan State Public Prosecutor Assisted by Mr.S.Karthikeyan, Additional Public Prosecutor
*****
COMMON ORDER
Crl.O.P.Nos.7840 & 7842 of 2020 are filed by the petitioners,
Mr.Dayanidhi Maran and Mr.T.R.Balu, who are the accused in Crime No.1415 of 2020 for the offence under Sections 3(1)(u) and 3(1)(v) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), 1989, registered by the
3/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
Inspector of Police, Thudiyalur Police Station, Coimbatore on 19.05.2020.
2.Crl.O.P.No.7841 of 2020 is filed by the petitioner, Dayanithi Maran, who is accused in Crime No.643 of 2020 for the offence under Sections 3(1)(u) and 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities), 1989, registered by the Inspector of Police, Coimbatore Thudialur
Police Station, Coimbatore on 18.05.2020.
3.The case in Crime No.1415 of 2020 is that on 19.05.2020, a complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant Sekar stating that on 13.05.2020, the
Members of Parliament belonging to DMK (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam)
Party namely Dhayanidhi Maran, T.R.Balu, Kalanithi and Tamilachi
Thangapandiyan met Mr.Shanmugam, IAS, Chief Secretary with regard to
COVID-19 relief work and further to submit petitions in this regard. At that time, the Chief Secretary did not respond and gave proper respect to them.
Thereafter, T.R.Balu and Dayanidhi Maran addressed the press and media persons, elaborating the manner in which they were treated by the Chief
Secretary in emotional mood, without any reason. Mr.Dayanadhi Maran stated that they were treated as third class citizens like under privilege people, which insulted, intimidated and sent shock waves among the SC and ST people.
4/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
Further, persons holding position in DMK Party in a sustained manner were intentionally humiliating and passing reference against the Scheduled Caste people. Previously, the DMK Organizing Secretary R.S.Bharathi claimed that the Scheduled Caste persons were appointed as High Court Judges at the mercy of DMK party for which several organizations of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes have raised objections and complaints were lodged. A case came to be registered against R.S.Bharathi in Crime No.119 of 2020 by the
Inspector of Police, E-3 Teynampet Police Station, Chennai. The former Chief
Minister of Tamil Nadu, late Dr.Kalaignar Karunanithy, on every breath claims himself to be the Protector of Scheduled Caste peoples' right and privilege. The opposition leader Mr.M.K.Stalin's son-in-law Mr.Dhayanidhi Maran has made offensive comments against SC & ST people. The office bearers of DMK are also with the same approach. The media as well as the other opposition leaders had not condemned the act of Mr.Dhayanadhi Maran, on the other hand were giving excuses that the comment was unintentional. The DMK party leader had not condemned the same and not taken any action against them. Hence to stop such derogative, provocative comments, a complaint came was lodged against them.
5/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
4.The case in Crime No.643 of 2020 is that when the defacto complainant viz., Jeganathan on 13.05.2020 at about 07.00 p.m., was watching
TV, he saw the petitioner along with other DMK Parliamentarians addressing the press and media after visiting the Chief Secretary, expressing their displeasure the manner in which the elected representatives were treated.
During the press meet, the petitioner Mr.Dayanidhi Maran said that as though they were treated like third class citizens under privileged persons with intention to humiliate, insult the Scheduled Caste people and thereby, promoted feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will against members of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes.
5.The contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner in
Crl.O.P.No.7840 of 2020 is that the alleged occurrence is said to have taken place on 13.05.2020, but the complaint came to be lodged after six days on
19.05.2020, for which no reason has been given for such delay. The Members of Parliament had gone to the office of the Chief Secretary to submit petitions received from one lakh people in the state of Tamil Nadu for the grievance of their food, shelter and clothing during the COVID-19 pandemic period. At that time, the Members of Parliament were treated with scant respect. Hence the petitioner along with other Members of Parliament addressed the press and
6/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020 media and words have been picked out of context and motive has been attributed as though the petitioner had insulted, humiliated and he was the reason in promoting humiliation, hatred or ill-will and enmity against the members of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes.
6.The learned senior counsel further submitted that the petitioner made no such comments and his words were doctored, further immediately in Twitter, he gave his explanation and expressed his remorse. The petitioner is a sitting member of the Parliament from Chennai Central Constituency belonging to
DMK Party who was a Cabinet Minister of the Nation on two occasions, hails from a respectable family and he is performing yeoman service to the people in the present COVID-19 pandemic.
7.Further, the registration of FIR is with malafide and abuse of process of law, the petitioner addressing the press and media has been projected out of context. It is well established principle that under the Act, stray words should never be picked out and attributed with motive. It has to be considered on the whole and under what context it is made to find out the ingredient of the matter.
There is a similar complaint in Crime No.643 of 2020 registered against the petitioner by the Inspector of Police, Coimbatore City Police Station, Variety
7/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
Hall Road, Coimbatore. On perusal of complaints, it is seen that they are verbatim, except for some cosmetic changes, no offence is made out as alleged in the averments of the complaint. The complaint is motivated with malice.
8.In support of his contention, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Prathvi Raj Chauhan Versus Union of India and others reported in 2020
SCC OnLine SC 159, in which it is held “the Court can, in exceptional cases, exercise power under section 482 Cr.PC for quashing the cases to prevent misuse of provisions on settled parameters”. The petitioner falls under these parameters and also submitted that the petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
9.The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in
Crl.O.P.Nos.7842 & 7843 of 2020 submitted that the petitioner is a Member of
Parliament (Sriperambadur Parliamentary Constituency) and also the leader of
DMK Parliamentary Party, former Union Cabinet Minister for a long period.
On 13.05.2020, the petitioner, leader of Parliamentary group along with three other Members of Parliament had met Shanmugham, IAS, Chief Secretary, to hand over one lakh complaints received from the public through the State of
8/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
Tamil Nadu by their party leader in help line programme “Ondrinaivom Va”.
The Chief Secretary treated them as innocuous persons and was not respective on the petitions submitted by them. They were not given due respect befitting their position as elected representative of the people. Thereafter, the petitioner along with other Members of Parliament addressed the press and media.
Admittedly, in the complaint, there was no mention in the complaint about the petitioner making any offensive statement. The petitioner only briefed about the state of affairs and the way in which they were treated by the Chief
Secretary.
10.The learned senior counsel further submitted that FIR in this case is a motivated one and the complaint is orchestrated by the Government at the behest of political powers. On the same allegation, similar case has been registered in Crime No.643 of 2020 by the Inspector of Police, Coimbatore City
Police Station, Variety Hall Road, Coimbatore on 18.05.2020. In that case, the petitioner's name has not been mentioned. Further, on comparison of both the complaints, it is apparent that the complaints are prepared in cut and paste method, exposing the falsity of the complaint. The complaint are without any prima facie material with malice in law. The petitioners have sent representation to the Speaker of Parliament raising Privilege notice against the
9/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
Chief Secretary, as a counter blast, these complaints are lodged against the petitioner. In a systematic manner the complaints are generated by cut and paste method by changing the name of the informant and lodging the complaint in various parts of the State. The offence charged in this case are Section
3(1)(u) and 3(1)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989. Section 3(1)(v) is with regard to disrespect against late person held in esteem by members of the Scheduled Castes or the
Scheduled Tribes. On the facts of this case, there is no mention of any late person. The mechanical reproduction of complaints is the reason for the same.
11.In support of his contention, the learned senior counsel relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr.Subhash Kashinath
Mahajan Versus State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2018) 6 SCC
454, particularly paragraph Nos.51, 57 and stressed on the direction given in paragraph No.79. After this judgment amendment in Section 18-A of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), 1989 was brought on 20.08.2018. In the case of Prathvi Raj Chauhan Versus Union of
India and others reported in 2020 SCC OnLine SC 159, the reason and applicability of amendment are clarified, the reference made to the earlier judgment wherein the power of this Court with regard to quash of complaint as
10/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020 well as grant of anticipatory bail if no prima facie case is made out was elaborately argued. The learned senior counsel submission is that in this case, there is no averment or allegation in the compliant against the petitioner whatsoever manner. To divert the issues with an malafide intention, the above complaint came to be registered against the petitioner.
12.The contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner in
Crl.O.P.No.7841 of 2020 is that a word used by the petitioner has been taken and given a meaning out of its context. The address to the press and media has to be looked and considered in total, on the other hand one word has been singled out and taken out of its context given coloured and doctored version imputing motive cast aspersions against the petitioner. On comparison of this complaint as well as the complaint in Crime No.1415 of 2020, it is seen both are identical which is done in cut and paste manner.
13.The learned senior counsel further submitted that the offence under
Section 3(1)(r) of the Act was included to show that the petitioner had intentionally insulted and humiliated people belonging to Scheduled Caste.
Further as per Section 3(u), enmity to be spurt between two groups. The petitioner has not promoted or attempted to promote feelings or enmity, hatred
11/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020 or ill-will against the members of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled
Tribes. In this case, there is no such identifiable groups who have been promoted with hatred or ill-will. The words uttered were not addressed to identifiable person or groups and there is no material to show that such persons have been humiliated, ill-will or insulted and there was enmity hatred, promoted by the petitioner.
14.The petitioners had collected one lakh representations from the affected people of Tamil Nadu, who were without food and relief materials.
The promised relief materials received were sub-standard which was brought to the notice of the Chief Secretary. To divert the issue, the above case against the petitioner are immediately filed with malafide intention. On reading of the entire complaint, it is seen that none of the persons of the deprived community have stated about any humiliation or suffering by them in any manner. In view of the same, taking one word out of context from the entire speech giving a doctored version coloured meaning by the prosecution and generating complaints from various places for the same offence by cut and paste method, would clearly show that the complaints are motivated with malice. The purpose for which the act enacted has been misused to make political score.
12/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
15.Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dr.Subhash Kashinath
Mahajan Versus State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2018) 6 SCC
454 and in the case of Prathiv Raj Chauhan Versus Union of India reported in 2020 SCC OnLine SC 159 had given reason how this act has been misused and in the absence of prima facie materials, the cases with malice have to be quashed and anticipatory bail to be granted to the petitioners.
16.The State Public Prosecutor submitted that the complaints were dated
18.05.2020 and 19.05.2020 and the cases were registered on the same day.
Immediately, the petitioners had rushed to this Court not giving any time for the investigation to be carried out. The respondent is not the reason for the delay in lodging the complaint, even before investigation could be carried out, the petitioners are thwarting the investigation by filing such petitions. The police are receiving similar complaints from other parts of the State, only after verification and satisfaction, the complaint were registered. The petitioners addressed to the press and media on 13.05.2020 is not disputed. It was broadcasted throughout the State causing displeasure and disharmony among the Scheduled Caste people and others. Even 70 years after independence, the petitioners, parliamentarians are using such words which insulted, humiliated and promoted ill-will, hatred of the scheduled caste people. The petitioners
13/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020 claiming to be elected representatives of parliament ought to have conducted themselves in proper manner and such comments are not to be made by them.
Further, the petitioners were aggressive with the Chief Secretary when they handed over the petitions. Despite the same, petitions were received and forwarded for further action. To politicalize the issue gain mileage and to project the State was not taking proper steps and care in containing COVID-19 and in giving relief to the needy such drama was created. Further passing messages in Twitter would amount to admission. The State Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail and quash petitions.
17.The State Public Prosecutor further submitted that as per Section
18-A, an amendment was brought on 20.08.2018, thereby non applicability of
Section 438 Cr.P.C not withstanding any judgment or order or direction of any
Court was brought in. The investigation is at initial stage, materials to be collected, the quash petitions are premature and the petitioners are not entitled for anticipatory bail.
18.The State Public Prosecutor further submitted that as per Section 15-
A, notice has to be sent to the informant Jeganathan, S/o.Ganesan, D.No.8/252,
Variety Hall Raod, CMC Colony, Coimbatore in Crime No.643 of 2020 and
14/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020 informant Sekar, S/o.Kumarasamy, No.73, Annai Indira Nagar,
Kavundampalayam, Coimbatore in Crime No.1415 of 2020 and the same shall be served through the respondent police and sought time for filing counter.
19.Mr.Rabu Manohar and Mr.Karthikeyan, learned counsels submitted that they may be permitted to file intervening petition for Mr.A.Muthu Palvesan of Palayankottai and Mr.Subaivasan of Tiruvelveli. Both of them had given complaint to the Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli against the petitioners herein with similar indictment. Hence, they are permitted to serve notice and file necessary petitions subject to maintainability.
20.Considering that the petitioners are elected parliamentarians, who submitted petitions and made representations with regard to sufferings and plight of the common man due to COVID-19, the complaints appear verbatim, reproduction of each other. In view of the elaborate arguments made by the learned senior counsels and by the learned State Public Prosecutor and from perusal of the materials produced, this Court admits the quash petitions and directs the State Public Prosecutor to take notice to the informants in all
Criminal Original Petitions and on the request of the State Public Prosecutor to file counter, time is granted.
15/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
21.Post the matter on 29.05.2020, the respondent Police are directed not to take any coercive action/steps against the petitioners in all Criminal Original
Petitions.
22.Crl.M.P.Nos.3997 & 4000 of 2020 in Crl.O.P.Nos.7841 & 7840 of
2020 filed by the petitioners are dismissed as not maintainable, since the petition for anticipatory bail to be filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. During the hearing, the Registry forwarded Crl.O.P.Nos.7844 & 7845 of 2020, anticipatory bail applications filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C by the petitioner/Mr.Dayanithi Maran.
23.Crl.M.P.Nos.3992, 3995 & 3999 of 2020 in Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7841 &
7842 filed by the petitioners for dispense with the production of certified copy of FIR in Crime Nos.643 & 1415 of 2020, are ordered.
23.05.2020 Internet : Yes vv2
16/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
To
1.The Inspector of Police, Coimbatore City Police Station, Variety Hall Road, Coimbatore 641 001.
2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Thudiyalur Police Station, Coimbatore 641 034.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
17/18 Crl.O.P.Nos.7840, 7842, 7841 & 7843 of 2020
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
vv2
CRL.O.P.No.7840 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3991, 3992, 3993 & 4000 of 2020
Crl.O.P.Nos.7842 & 7843 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3998 & 3999 of 2020
Crl.O.P.No.7841 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3994, 3995, 3996 & 3997 of 2020
23.05.2020
18/18