Ban on release of Senthil Mallar’s two works lifted, but conditions apply

CHENNAI: A full bench of the Madras High Court has permitted the release of two Tamil books titled Meendezhum Pandiyar Varalaru and Venthar Kulathin Irupppidam Ethu?, both written by K Senthil Mallar, which had been forfeited following orders of the State government passed in 2013 and 2015, subject to the condition that the author delete the objectionable portions.

The bench of justices M M Sundresh, Pushpa Sathyanarayana and R Mahadevan granted the permission on Friday while disposing of two writ petitions from Mallar. The books were forfeited by invoking powers under Section 95 CrPC.

The bench pointed out that the benefits of being under the Schedule Caste are enjoyed by the members of the petitioner’s community. The petitioner cannot call himself as the voice of his community. Moreover, the notification or de-notification of a caste from the schedule or another category are within the domain of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. The decisions are taken based on social and economic factors by the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and the National Commission for Backward Classes. It is always open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate ministry, the bench said.

As regards petitioner’s contention that no opportunity was afforded to him before the impugned orders were passed, the bench pointed out that the purpose of Section 95 CrPC is to prevent the disruption of public harmony, tranquillity and peace, when it is instigated in the objectionable material in the opinion of the government. It is sufficient, if the contents cause sufficient apprehensions about the incitement of violence between different classes of people. It is not a punitive action.

It is an imminent action failing which the purpose of Article 19 (2) of the Constitution and Section 95 of CrPC would become redundant. “Therefore, we are of the view that while invoking the powers under Section 95, it is not necessary to hear the author of the book before passing orders and hence, the orders are not arbitrary,” the bench said.

During the course of hearing, when the bench pointed out to the petitioner that several portions in both the books are abusive against other castes and in the nature of spreading hatred and disharmony, thereby posing a threat to public order and security of the State, the petitioner had agreed to make certain alterations in the books.

In its reply, the State raised objections to some alterations in certain portions, stating that the new changes would not dissolve the objections. As most of the alterations have been accepted by the State, the bench said that there cannot be any justification for the forfeiture to continue.