HC reserves orders on MNM chief’s bail plea

During his campaign for his party candidate, who’s contesting from Aravakurichi Assembly constituency on May 12, Kamal came under criticism over his alleged remarks against Nathuram Godse.

However, the Aravakurichi police had filed a case against Kamal under Sections 153 (A) and 295 (A) of IPC, based on a complaint lodged by Ramakrishnan alleging that the petitioner made hate speech in public creating communal disharmony.  

The anticipatory bail petition moved by Kamal after getting a direction from the HC over the same on Wednesday, came up for hearing before Justice Pugazhendhi.

The counsel on behalf of the petitioner claimed that the FIR was filed on May 14 under two Sections of IPC without making preliminary inquiries, moreover crux of the complaint was that the petitioner incited communal hatred through his speech, but no untoward incident had occurred so far. More importantly, the complainant was not an eye witness, but it’s just hearsay that he informed the police, who filed the FIR based on it, without any evidence. Even, the Delhi High Court dismissed a case on a similar charge against the petitioner citing that the onus was on Election Commission to take action.

The counsel then showed video content of the petitioner’s speech before Justice Pugazhendhi. The Justice asked whether it was necessary to arrest the petitioner to enquire him. However, the state government counsel replied that the petitioner needs to be summoned for enquiry and may be arrested if his explanation was not satisfactory. On hearing, the bench advised media and political parties to refrain from discussing such remarks and reserved the bail plea order without setting a date.