1. “I may not agree with what you say, but will defend to the death, your right to say it”, said the author Voltaire (Attributed to Voltaire by S.G. Tallentyre in “The Friends of Voltaire” 1907).

Prelude

India has the benefit of one of the most modern and liberal Constitutions. It is reflective of its rich and diverse heritage, yet enunciating the modern principles of democracy, as distinguished from a feudal society. One of the most cherished rights under our Constitution is to speak one’s mind and write what one thinks. No doubt, this is subject to reasonable restrictions, but then the ambit of what one can do is wide.

2. Whether the society is ready to read a particular book and absorb what it says without being offended, is a debate which has been raging for years together. Times have changed. What was not acceptable earlier became acceptable later. “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” is a classical example of it. The choice to read is always with the reader. If you do not like a book, throw it away. There is no compulsion to read a book. Literary tastes may vary – what is right and acceptable to one may not be so to others. Yet, the right to write is unhindered. If the contents seek to challenge or go against the very Constitutional values, raise racial issues, denigrate castes, contain blasphemous dialogues, carry unacceptable sexual contents or start a war against the very existence of our country, the State would, no doubt, step in.

3. The ban on books has been a mixed bag. In a number of cases, it did not receive the nod from the Court – See Ranjit D. Udeshi vs. State of Maharashtra, 1965 Cri L.J. 8; Samaresh Bose vs. Amal Mitra, 1986 Cri L.J. 24; State of Maharashtra vs. Sangharaj Damodar Rupawate, (2010) 7 S.C.C. 398 and Abdul Ali vs. State of Kerala, (2016) Crl. L.J. 433 (Ker).

4. In the case on hand, we are confronted with a strange situation where a Tamil novel, “Madhorubagan” authored by Prof. Perumal Murugan, translated into English as “One Part Woman”, has been a recipient of literary awards, yet is alleged to contain dangerous and damaging materials, evoking emotions of the residents of the location of its storyline. The novel is not really religious in content, but is alleged to be narrating non-existent conventions which seek to tarnish the image of the populace of the area.

5. In essence, the novel seeks to relate the travails and tribulations of a childless couple and the barbs of the society against it, while the couple seeks to battle it out against social and familial pressures. Somewhere, the family pressures gain an upper hand and what transpires to assist procreation is the troubling area of the story.

6. Is the novel based on history and if so, what is its effect? Despite certain locations being mentioned, the author has tried to build a case that it is not so, while the critics of the novel say this is a subsequent thought. Should there always be a recorded history to prove events or can even folklore carried from person to person form the basis of a book? And how do you obviate any offences caused to you? Would what Salman Rushdie said, be the cure, “It is very easy not to be offended by a book, you simply have to close it”?

7. This is a wider canvass, but in a multi-cultural, diverse society, where different religious beliefs are important to varied sections, there are atheists, who are expected to show a minimal element of responsibility in order that there are no unnecessary dissensions on religious and social lines by intrusions into the customs, beliefs and practices of different sections of society, so that such activities satisfy the touchstone of our Constitution. Religion is a major influence in our country, even though sometimes its credibility and relevance is questioned. However, all this is eternal and personal.

8. So much for the wider canvass, for the time being. We now turn to the facts of the case, which are in a narrow compass.

Facts

9. Professor Dr. Perumal Murugan is an Associate Professor