Madras HC adjourns Dinakaran supporter’s plea to tomorrow

Mersal, Mersal row, Vijay, Madras High Court, Madras HC Mersal, Vijay film, Ban on Mersal, India news, Indian Express

The Madras High Court on Friday reserved its order on a petition by a supporter of sidelined AIADMK leader T T V Dinakaran for quashing an FIR against him and 16 others for allegedly defaming the prime minister and the Tamil Nadu chief minister.

Pugazhenthi, who is the party’s Karnataka unit secretary, along with Dinakaran and 15 others was charged with issuing pamphlets opposing the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test in which they allegedly defamed Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chief Minister K Palaniswami.

When the matter came up before Justice M S Ramesh, Advocate General Vijay Narayanan submitted that the case was filed on the basis of a Supreme Court judgement on NEET that there should not be any agitations which provoke law-and-order problem.

Besides, a direction was given to the state chief secretary to ensure that there is no law-and-order problem.

The apex court had also made it clear that peaceful demonstrations and protests were the fundamental right of the people.

A total of 3,000 FIRs had been registered in Tamil Nadu against the NEET agitators, Narayanan said.

If the FIR is quashed, it will be a mockery of the apex court’s order, he added.

Counsel for Pugazhenthi, N G R Prasad, objecting to this, pointed out that the apex court itself had said peaceful agitations are the fundamental right of the people.

The judge, after seeing the apex court order, said it was placed before him only now and expressed his opinion that quashing of the FIR amounts to interference of the apex court order, adding, he was reserving order on the petition.

Pugazhenthi and others have been booked for sedition, unlawful assembly and defamation among other offences in the FIR.

After hearing arguments yesterday, Justice Ramesh expressed the opinion that matter in the pamphlets cannot be treated as defamatory.

When the additional public prosecutor, who appeared for police, sought time for appearance of the advocate general on behalf of the state for arguing the matter, the judge posted the matter for today.

The petitioner submitted several agitations had been held across the state opposing NEET with circulation of similar pamphlets with slogans against state and central governments.

The complaint against Dinkaran was ‘ill-motivated’, Pugazhenthi contended, seeking quashing of the FIR.