SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Mad) 1464

N.ANAND VENKATESH
Mathew Samuel – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : N.R. Elango, adv
For the Respondents: A. Natarajan, adv

JUDGMENT :

N. Anand Venkatesh, J.

1. Mr. A. Natarajan, learned Public Prosecutor takes notice for the 1st respondent. Notice to the 2nd respondent returnable by four weeks. Private notice is also permitted.

2. This case raises a very important issue as to whether any words either spoken or written or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise, made against an individual person, whatever position he is holding and which does not result in promoting feelings of enmity or hatred between different groups on grounds of religion, race, language, etc., will come within the purview of Section 153A of IPC. This position must be clarified since it is noticed that in many cases which involves governmental authorities, particularly having political overtones and which at the best only affects the interest/reputation of the individuals concerned, and does not in fact cause any disharmony or promotes any hatred between religion, race, community etc., FIR is being registered for an offence u/s. 153A and 505 IPC.

3. In the present case the FIR has been registered by the respondent Police based on the Complaint given by the 2nd respondent who claims to be the Secretary of the IT Wing of the AIA

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top