Dave: Is this the responsibility of the MP ? He’s asking for people to be thrashed.
Bench: We’ve gone through this. Please be precise. We are not asking you to rush, but take it as if we’ve read them.
Dave reads out statements of Raju which submit that the YSR Congress was only going to vaccinate Christians and Reddys, and volunteers should be thrashed.
Dave submits that Raju instigated people of different communities to kill each other. He reads out a few statements.
Dave refers to the counter-affidavit filed by the Andhra Pradesh which compiles the hateful statements made by Raju.
Dave: He tried to stroke hatred against Christian and Reddy communities. They look orchestrated and an attempt to cause disaffection against the government. They squarely within the contours of S. 124A.
Dave: Turn to page 17. On 3rd May, the high ranking officer was requested to go into it. 45 videos were collected and attached. The findings were restricted to the fact that Raju did not limit himself to fair criticism and tried to stroke hatred.
Dave: But he crossed all boundaries. There’s a report by a senior police officer. Please see the report. It’s in the additional documents on behalf of Petitioner.
Dave: And coming from someone who is an MP. His word carries weight. And that too during COVID times. We don’t want unrest during such difficult times. We gave him time and told him that what he was doing was wrong and he should correct himself.
Dave: If you say something against CM, it is irrelevant. I told this to the clients as well that at the most it is criminal defamation. But, if you use this to incite hatred between two communities. He has saying incendiary things between Reddy’s and Christians.
Dave: You have to see if the offences are prime facie committed or not. If he has not denied that, then the Court cannot interfere.