CRL OP(MD). No.1642 of 2024 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 16.10.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP(MD)No.1642 of 2024 and CRL MP(MD)No.1154 of 2024 1.K.Ramasubbu 2.Dr.L.Ramasubbu ... Petitioners Vs. 1.The State represented by Sub Inspector of Police, S.S. Colony Police Station, Madurai. 2.Sakkarai Ammal ... Respondents PRAYER :- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in FIR in Cr.No.26 of 2024 dated 24.01.2024, pending on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same. 1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1642 of 2024 For Petitioners : Mr.Abdul Saleem Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Elambharathi For Respondent No.1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi Government Advocate [Crl. Side] For Respondent No.2 : Mr.S.Manohar ORDER The petitioner seeks to quash the impugned FIR registered for the offences under Sections 153, 153(1)(a), 505(1)(b) and 505(2) of IPC. 2.The allegation is that the petitioner is the editor and publisher of a Tamil Daily, that published a news item in the publication on 21.01.2023 to the effect that the government had refused permission for performing annadhanam, special poojas in temples that the said news item was false and was intended to promote enmity between two religious groups and has committed the above said offence. 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1642 of 2024 3.The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the news item published by the petitioners cannot be said to be false and that in atleast three places, the Government had refused permission to perform poojas and annadhanam and that in any case, even if the allegations are accepted to be true, they would not constitute offences under Sections 153 or 505(1)(b) of IPC and relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bilal Ahmed Kaloo Vs. State of A.P. reported in (1997) 7 SCC 431 and Shiv Prasad Semwal Vs. State of Uttarkhand and others reported in 2024 Live Law (SC) 251, in support of his submission. 4.The learned Counsel for the second respondent would submit that the subject news item was published only with an intention to promote enmity between two religious groups and since it is a false publication, it was likely to promote enmity between two groups and that the question as to whether the allegations constitute the offence mentioned in the FIR have to be only decided during the course of the investigation and the investigation cannot be scuttled at this stage. 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1642 of 2024 5.The learned Government Advocate reiterated the contents in the FIR and submitted that the investigation is still pending and cannot be scuttled and only the investigation would reveal whether the offences have been committed by the petitioners and therefore, sought for dismissal of the petition. 6.The gist of the allegation in the impugned FIR is that by publishing the news item, the petitioners intended to spread a false news to promote disharmony between the persons and also bring about a bad name to the Tamil Nadu Government. 7.Learned Counsel for the petitioner referred to the orders passed by the Government denying the permission to certain persons for conducting poojas and annadhanams on the eve of opening of the Ram temple. 8.Therefore, this Court is of the view that the news items cannot be said to be wholly false. Be that as it may. The allegations do not suggest 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1642 of 2024 the commission of the offence under Section 153 and 505(1) (b) of IPC. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the common feature in both sections is promoting a feeling of enmity, hatred or ill will “between different” religious or racial or linguistic or regional groups or castes or communities. 9.The relevant portion of the judgment in Bilal Ahmed Kaloo's case referred supra is as follows: “15.The common feature in both sections being promotion of feeling of enmity, hatred or ill will “between different” religious or racial or linguistic or regional groups or castes and communities, it is necessary that at least two of such groups or communities should be involved. Merely inciting the feeling of one community or group without any reference to any other community or group cannot attract either of the two sections.” 10.The relevant portion of the judgment in Shiv Prasad Semwal's case referred supra is as follows: 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1642 of 2024 “29.In the case of Manzar Sayeed Khan v. State of Maharashtra and Anr, this Court held that for applying Section 153A IPC, the presence of two or more groups or communities is essential, whereas in the present case, no such groups or communities were referred to in the news article.” 11.Admittedly, in this case, there is no reference to any two groups or anything to suggest that the news item was intended to promote enmity between two groups. The allegation even if accepted to be true, at best suggests that the petitioner had published a false news item, to defame the Tamil Nadu Government. Such an allegation would not constitute the offences under Sections 153, 153(1)(a), 505(1)(b) and 505(2) of IPC. 12.For the reasons stated supra, this Court is inclined to quash the impugned FIR in Crime No.26 of 2024 dated 24.01.2024. 6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1642 of 2024 13.With the above observations, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 16.10.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No MR 7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1642 of 2024 To 1.The Sub Inspector of Police, S.S. Colony Police Station, Madurai. 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1642 of 2024 SUNDER MOHAN,J MR ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1642 of 2024 Date : 16.10.2025 9/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis