T.J.GNANAVEL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed seeking to quash the F.I.R. in Crime No.275 of 2022, filed against the petitioners, by the first respondent police, pursuant to the directions of the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, for the offence punishable under Sec. 295A of IPC.

(2.) The crux of the allegation in the FIR is that the defacto complainant/second respondent and his friend has watched a movie by name "Jai Bhim" acted and produced by Mr.Suriya (A2) and directed by Mr.T.J.Gnanavel (A1) and released in OTT platform. It is projected that as if it is a real story and that they came to know that it in order to insult and humiliate the defacto complainant's community and incite communal violence, the story has been projected as if a Irular community man was killed by a Sub Inspector of Police named Guru. It is the case of the defacto complainant that name of Guru has been given to the police officer and in fact the name Guru refers to the former President of Vanniyar Sangam. Further, it can be seen that the daily calendar of the Vanniyar Sangam was also used and thereby FIR has been lodged for an offence punishable under Sec. 295A of IPC.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners vehemently contended that the film showcases the torture inflicted upon the Irular community people under police custody. The story is based on a case conducted before the Madras High Court. The names are not connected with any particular sec. or community. The movie was also given appropriate certificate by the Censor Board. He further contended that absolutely there is no allegation which attracts the offence under Sec. 295A of IPC. Merely on the inference and presumptions of the defacto complainant that his caste leader's name has been used, the offence under Sec. 295A of IPC cannot be invoked.