Journalist redacts objectionable statements against Periyar from his article; informs Madras High Court

Justice N. Anand Venkatesh records the redaction and adjourns to February 13 the plea to quash a FIR registered against the journalist for accusing Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin of having given a call for Hindu genocide

Published - January 31, 2024 12:18 am IST - CHENNAI

New Delhi-based journalist Abhijit Majumder on Tuesday informed the Madras High Court of having redacted certain objectionable statements about Dravidar Kazhagam founder Thanthai Periyar, alias E.V. Ramasamy, from an article penned by him in September 2023 accusing Tamil Nadu Sports Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin of having given a call for Hindu genocide.

Justice N. Anand Venkatesh recorded the statement made by advocate Ramaswamy Meyappan, on behalf of the journalist, regarding the redaction and decided to hear on February 13 the latter’s plea to quash an FIR registered against him by the Tamil Nadu police pursuant to the publication of the article in the opinion column of news website Firstpost.

The article, Udhayanidhi Stalin’s call for Hindu genocide does BJP a big favour in Tamil Nadu, was published online on September 3, 2023, after the Minister had in a conference on September 2, 2023 equated Sanatana Dharma to vector-borne diseases and called for its annihilation. The article had also criticised Periyar heavily.

After its publication, the police had registered the FIR under Sections 153 (wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot), 505(1)(b) (publishing statements that induces a person to commit offence against the State or against public tranquility) and 505(2) (publishing statements that create or promote enmity, hatred or ill will between classes) of the IPC.When the FIR quash petition was listed for hearing on January 8 this year, Justice Venkatesh read the opinion piece and found certain “highly condemnable and derogatory” statements against Periyar. Then, the petitioner’s counsel sought time to take instructions on redacting those portions.

Time granted

Accordingly, it was informed to the judge on Tuesday that those portions had been redacted. However, as Additional Public Prosecutor A. Damodaran and the complainant’s counsel sought time to argue against the FIR quash plea, the judge decided to hear them in detail on February 13.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.