IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON : 17.11.2023 PRONOUNCED ON : 05.12.2023 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No.6763 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3711 of 2020 & 2680 of 2021 Dr.S.Ramadoss ...Petitioner -Vs-

Murasoli Trust Rep. by its Trustee R.S.Bharathi, No.180, Kodambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the entire records in C.C.No.1280 of 2020 on the file of the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai District and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.Anantha Narayanan, Senior Counsel For Mr.K.Balu For Respondent : Mr.N.R.Elango, Senior Counsel For Mr.S.Manuraj

ORDER

This petition has been filed to quash the compliant lodged by the respondent in C.C.No.1280 of 2020 on the file of the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai District, thereby taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 499 & 500 of IPC, as against the petitioner.

2. The respondent filed private complaint for the offences punishable under Sections 499 & 500 of IPC. The crux of the allegations in the complaint is that the respondent owns, prints and publishes the daily newspaper Murasoli. The petitioner is the founder of a political party and he manages a twitter handle under the name and style of Dr.S.Ramadoss with URL http://twitter.com/drramadoss (hereinafter after called as “official twitter account”). The petitioner twitted from his official twitter account on 17.10.2019. Further he also twitted four twits from his official twitter account on 19.10.2019 at about 12.07 p.m. Once again he twitted from his official twitter account on 19.11.2019 at 8.39 p.m.

3. According to the respondent, the contents of the twits are false, baseless, untrue and per se defamatory. It constitutes a calculated attempt to malign the reputation of the respondent. The constitutional protection of freedom of speech and expression is subject to reasonable restrictions, which includes defamation as such, the action of the petitioner falls beyond the scope of freedom of speech. He is seeking political mileage and his ulterior motive is apparent from the twits made by him against the respondent's political party. There is no bona fide reason for raising this issue by way of twitter. Therefore, the respondent has suffered immeasurable mental agony and the reputation of the Murasoli Trust has been degraded, tarnished and smeared due to the twits made by the petitioner.

4. Therefore, the respondent caused legal notice dated

22.11.2019, thereby called upon the petitioner to remove the above defamatory twits dated 17.10.2019, 19.10.2019 & 19.11.2019. Further tender an open and unconditional apology within 48 hours from the date of receipt of the notice and refrain from repeating such unethical acts in future. After receipt of the same, the petitioner issued reply notice containing untrue and defamatory statement. Hence the respondent lodged the present complaint. On receipt of the complaint, the trial Court had taken cognizance in C.C.No.1280 of 2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 499 & 500 of IPC and issued summons to the petitioner.

5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the complaint filed by the respondent is not at all maintainable under penal law, since the trust has no right to question the twits made by the petitioner. The trust is not a legal entity to make a complaint for defamation before the Court of law. The petitioner being the founder and leader of the political party, relentlessly fighting for securing social justice for all section of people and to eradicate poverty to provide free education for children and to eliminate corruption from public life and politics. He is the one to critically analyze the policies, acts and deed of the Governments in power and of various organizations in public domain including political parties and makes unbias