CRL OP(MD). No.8765 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

Date : 06/05/2022

PRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.S.RAMESH

CRL OP(MD). No.8765 of 2022

Rahamathullah ... Petitioner/Accused

Vs

The Inspector of Police,

Thallakulam Police Station,

Madurai

City,

(In Crime No.223 of 2022). ... Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : M/s.Jinnah S.M.A.,

Advocate.

For Respondent : M/s.A.Thiruvadi Kumar

Addl. Public Prosecutor

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.

PRAYER :-

For Bail in Crime No.223 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent

Police

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

On 17.03.2022, at 17.30 hrs., a meeting was convened at

Goripalayam Mosque street, Madurai Town by the Tamil Nadu Thowhith

Jamath (in short 'TNTJ'). The meeting was convened apparently to

protest against the recent judgment of the Karnataka High Court,

upholding the ban of Hijabs imposed by the State Government in

educational institutions.

2. The petitioner herein, who is the State Audit Committee

member of TNTJ, was the key speaker in the meeting and his speech

suggested for promotion of enmity between different groups, on

grounds of religion, etc., apart from inciting for commission of

offence against the public in general and the Judges of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court and the High Courts in particular. This resulted in

registration of a criminal case against the petitioner herein and

two others under Sections 153(A), 505(1)(b), 505(1)(c), 505(2),

506(i) and 109 IPC. In consequence to the registration of the

crime, the petitioner herein was remanded to judicial custody on

20.03.2022.

1/7

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

CRL OP(MD). No.8765 of 2022

3. In the speech addressed by the petitioner herein, he made a

reference to the death of an Additional District Judge of Dhanbad

District, Jharkand State, who died when an auto ricksaw ran over him

and which, the petitioner suggested was an intentional murder.

Referring to this incident, the petitioner in unequivocal words,

suggested that in view of the verdict pronounced by the Karnataka

High Court upholding the ban on Hijab, the Judges of the High Courts

and the Hon'ble Supreme Court are likely to face similar

consequences.

4. I had the occasion to watch the video clipping of the speech

of the petitioner herein in the social media. The entire speech

incites enmity and revenge on the Hon'ble Judges, in general. On an

overall appraisal, the offences under Sections 153(A), 505, 506(i)

and 109 IPC have been clearly made out and therefore, the respondent

had rightly registered the crime against the petitioner and two

others under these sections. The offences, thus having been made

out, requires to be sternly dealt with. Since the investigation is

still pending, the law will takes its own course.

5. The petitioner now seeks for release on bail, by admitting

his guilt and offering an unconditional apology, through a duly

sworn in affidavit dated 06.05.2022, attested by the Jailor of the

Central Prison, Madurai. The petitioner has accepted that he will

publish a public apology in the newspapers, in accordance with the

affirmations in his affidavit.

6. Apart from the apologetic plea, the learned counsel for the

petitioner did not raise any legal grounds, seeking for grant of

bail. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor,

submitted that the provocative speech clearly attracts the

provisions under the Indian Penal Code, for which, the petitioner

has been implicated and therefore, submitted that since the

investigation is still pending, the petitioner should not be

released on bail.

7. The affidavit filed by the petitioner dated 06.05.2022 reads

as follows:

I, Rahamathullah, son of Riz