The Kerala High Court has quashed an FIR against Goa Governor P S Sreedharan Pillai for certain remarks in his speech in 2018 against the entry of women of all ages in the Lord Ayyappa temple at Sabarimala.
Justice P V Kunhikrishnan said the offence under section 505(1)(b) (statements conducing to public mischief) of the IPC was not made out as he had delivered the speech at a meeting of the Yuva Morcha’s state committee and not at a public gathering.
Section 505(1)(b) provides that whosoever makes a statement “with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public whereby any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquility”, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years or with fine or both.
The court said, in its recent judgment, that the speech had not induced anyone to commit a crime against the State or public tranquility and for that reason also the offence under section 505(1)(b) of the IPC was not made out.
Furthermore, Pillai is presently the Governor of Goa. As per Article 361(2) of the Constitution, “no criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued against the President, or the Governor of a state, in any court during his term of office”, the court said.
Advertisement
“Therefore, the petitioner (Pillai) is entitled to immunity under Article 361 of the Constitution as long as he remains the Governor of Goa,” it said and allowed his plea to quashf the criminal proceedings against him.
Pillai, in his speech, had also criticised the Supreme Court order permitting entry of women of all ages into the Sabarimala temple. The High Court said that “a fair and reasonable criticism of a judgment, which is a public document, would not constitute contempt or attract criminal offences”.
The FIR was lodged against Pillai, then state president of the BJP, on a complaint by a journalist who had alleged that in his speech on November 4, 2018, Pillai stated that “closure of ‘Sabarimala Nada’ (temple doors) by the ‘Thanthri’ (head priest) in case of the entry by ‘yuvathi’ (adolescent women) will not amount to contempt of court”.
The prosecution had urged the court to not to interfere with the investigation in the case as the probe was still going on. It had also contended before the court that statements by Pillai in his speech were alarming to the public and could induce individuals to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquility.
Disagreeing with the prosecution, the court also said that simply because the speech by Pillai in a hotel was published by the news channels and media, the petitioner cannot be held liable for the offences punishable under section 505(1)(b) IPC.
“Media has a right to publish news and therefore, they cannot be blamed as well,” it said. The court also noted that Pillai in his speech made statements “which would show that the attempt is to unite all communities to protect the interests of Hindus”.
“Therefore, it cannot be said that the speech made by the petitioner (Pillai), that also in a conference hall, to the youth wing of BJP will cause fear or alarm to the public or to a section of the public,” the court said.
