The Supreme Court has set aside an order of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court which had quashed criminal proceedings registered against YouTuber Maridhas Malaichamy for an alleged tweet.In an order passed on January 9, but uploaded yesterday, the Court observed that the High Court acted in "haste", without giving adequate time for the investigating agency.Criticising the High...
The Supreme Court has set aside an order of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court which had quashed criminal proceedings registered against YouTuber Maridhas Malaichamy for an alleged tweet.
In an order passed on January 9, but uploaded yesterday, the Court observed that the High Court acted in "haste", without giving adequate time for the investigating agency.
Criticising the High Court's approach, the Supreme Court noted : "The FIR came to be lodged on 09.12.2021, immediately, on the very next date, the quashing petition was filed and within a period of four days i.e. 14.12.2021, the impugned judgment and order has been passed and the criminal proceedings are quashed".
"As per the settled position of law, it is the right conferred upon the Investigating Agency to conduct the investigation and reasonable time should be given to the Investigating Agency to conduct the investigation unless it is found that the allegations in the FIR do not disclose any cognizable offence at all or the complaint is barred by any law", the Court added.
A Bench of
Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar observed that the High Court shouldn't have quashed the FIR without giving any time to investigate the matter and further said that this was against the law laid down by the Top Court. The Bench particularly relied on the judgment in
Neeharika Infrastructure vs The State Of Maharashtra which had clarified when criminal proceedings could be quashed under section 482 of the CrPC.
In that case, it was held that unless there's a case of gross abuse of power against those in charge of the investigation, the High Court should hesitate to interfere at a premature stage of the investigation.
In the hearing, Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde for the state government had submitted that while quashing the criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court had conducted a mini-trial which is wholly impermissible.
Maridhas is a political commentator on social media platforms like ‘Twitter’ and ‘YouTube’. On December 9, 2021, a day after the unfortunate demise of General Bipin Rawat and other army officers, he made an offending tweet. YouTuber M. Maridhas had asked on Twitter whether Tamil Nadu is 'turning into another Kashmir under the DMK Rule'.
The Madurai police had registered an FIR against Maridas for making certain comments celebrating the death of former Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Bipin Rawat's demise in the Coonoor chopper crash.
Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madras High Court had observed that the tweet in question was never intended to subvert the existing government. Rather, it was meant to reinforce the might of the state apparatus.
Challenging this order, the plea moved by the State government argued that the High Court was wrong in its approach.
"The Because the High Court failed to consider the submissions of the petitioner that, the prosecution has filed an application seeking police custody of the respondent and that only a proper investigation would unearth further facts."
Further, it was stated that the High Court had come to its conclusion, without any material on record. "In fact, the accused himself had removed the tweet by acknowledging that his tweet is creating a law and order situation", the plea had argued.
Case Title: State represented by The Inspector of Police Vs Maridass and Anr | Crl. A. No. 67/2023
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 25
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Sr. Adv. Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Mr. Shobhit Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Raghav Gupta, Adv. Mr. Sharukh Ali, Adv. Mr. Tanay Hegde, Adv.
Summary - Supreme Court takes exception to Madras High Court quashing an FIR in four days without giving adequate time for investigation
Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 482- As per the settled position of law, it is the right conferred upon the Investigating Agency to conduct the investigation and reasonable time should be given to the Investigating Agency to conduct the investigation unless it is found that the allegations in the FIR do not disclose any cognizable offence at all or the complaint is barred by any law.