HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA *****

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6179 of 2023 Between:

S.Siddharth ... Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad and another ...Respondents DATE OF ORDER: 25^th July, 2025 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI

1 Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to Yes/No see the Judgment?

2 Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Yes/No Reporters/Journals

3 Whether HER Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Yes/No Judgment?

___________________

JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J * THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI + Criminal Petition No.6179 of 2023 % Date: 25^th July, 2025 Between:

S.Siddharth ... Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad and another ...Respondents ! Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri N. Naveen Kumar ! Assistant Public Prosecutor for the Respondent No.1-State: Smt.S.Madhavi >HEAD NOTE:

? Cases referred

1. (2024) 6 SUPREME COURT CASES 181

2. 1992 SCC (SUPP) 1 335 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.6179 OF 2023

O R D E R

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-

accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.3610 of 2023 on the file of the learned XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act (for short ‘the Act’) and Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’). 02. Heard Sri N. Naveen Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and Smt.S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent No.1. No representation on behalf of the unofficial respondent.

Perused the record.

03. The brief case of the prosecution is that the petitioner-accused had intentionally made sexist and derogatory remarks on Twitter against women who have attained significant achievements in their respective fields. It is alleged that the petitioner-accused had tweeted as: “Subtle cock champion of the world… Thank God we have protectors of India. (Sic) Shame on you #Rihanna”. The said tweet is alleged to be defamatory in nature and specifically aimed at Ms. Saina Nehwal, thereby tarnishing her reputation and undermining the dignity of a woman who has not only represented India at international platforms but has also brought glories for the country. Hence, the respondent No.2 requested for necessary action against the petitioner-accused.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-accused has no involvement in the alleged offence. It is contended that the impugned tweet was made by the petitioner-accused in exercise of his right to freedom of speech and expression, without any malice or ill intent. In order to avoid any misunderstanding, the petitioner, acting bona fide, issued a clarification on 10.01.2022 regarding the jovial remark made in reference to Ms. Saina Nehwal, stating that the comment was intended as a reference to the idiom "cock-and-bull story" and not otherwise. The clarification read as follows: “COCK & BULL — That’s the reference. Reading otherwise is unfair and leading! Nothing disrespectful was intended, said or insinuated. Period.” Furthermore, Ms. Saina Nehwal, in a press statement published in the New Indian Express (Online Edition) dated 13.01.2022, acknowledged that the petitioner had apologized for the comment and expressed satisfaction with the same. It is further submitted that the respondent No.2 has no locus standi to lodge the present complaint. There is no incriminating material on record to substantiate the allegations made against the petitioner- accused. The contents of the FIR as well as charge sheet do not disclose the necessary and essential ingredients required to constitute the offences under Section 67 of the Act and Section 509 of the IPC.

05. With the above submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused while praying for the quashment of