Click Here To Read LiveLaw Hindi- The First Hindi Legal News Website

Forwarding Social Media Posts Equal To Endorsing It: Madras HC Denies Anticipatory Bail To BJP Leader S Ve Shekher [Read Judgment]

While rejecting anticipatory bail plea of journalist turned BJP leader S Ve Shekher who allegedly shared a derogatory Facebook post on women journalists, the Madras High Court has observed that sharing or forwarding a message in social media is equal to accepting and endorsing the message.

No one has any right to abuse women and if done it is a violation of rights. When calling a person with community name itself is a crime, using such unparliamentarily words is more heinous.

Words are more powerful than acts, When a celebrity-like person forwards messages like this, the common public will start believe it that this type of things are going on”, the court said.

“What is said is important, but who has said it, is very important in a society because people respect persons for the social status. When a celebrity-like person forwards messages like this, the common public will start believe it that this type of things are going on. This sends a wrong message to the society at a time when we are talking about women empowerment, Justice S Ramathilagam said in the order.

“The language and the words used are not indirect but a direct abusive obscene foul language which is not expected from a person of this calibre and age who claims to be a literate with lot of credential with lot of followers”.

S Ve Shekher, in his petition, had said he had received a message from his friend and under the bona fide impression, as the message was from the one who usually forwards good and patriotic messages, he, due to inadvertency by mistake, forwarded the said message without reading the contents and knowing the nature of the said message. Subsequently, the same was pointed out by his friend that the said content was an abusive one, he deleted the same as it was not at all accepted for him and condemnable in nature.

“It is also to be remembered that Indian women, who fought as equals as men in the nationalist struggle, the act of the petitioner smashes and affects the feeling of each person. On hearing the arguments of the intervening petitioners, the petitioner has hurt the feeling not only the individual but the feeling of each reporter. The said post in the Facebook created a disturbance in the society and there is also a designed attempt on the part of the accused by keeping himself behind the scene and instigating the persons. It is also observed that only after protest by all group of people, the case was registered and immediately after registering the case, the post in the Facebook also blocked by the accused. It is argued by the petitioners that this shows the ulterior motive of the accused. The intervening petitioner has expressed their grievance that the manner of investigation is being made in this case affect the feeling of the entire society and the feeling of the society has to be considered”

Words are more powerful than acts

The Court observed that the words are more powerful than acts.

“Not all murders are given capital punishment. We look into the circumstances and all related aspects under which the act was done. Those words used in the message are not said under emotion. People use such words during quarrel and later they may regret but putting things in writing or typing means they know the consequences and do it”.

The court further observed: “Daily we see young emotional boys getting arrested for doing this type of activities in Social media? Law is same to everyone and people should not lose faith in our judiciary. Mistakes and crimes are not same. Only children can make mistakes which can be pardoned, if the same is done by elderly people, it becomes an offence.”

No one has any right to abuse women and if done it is a violation of rights

The Court also observed that no one has any right to abuse women and if done it is a violation of rights. When calling a person with community name itself is a crime, using such unparliamentarily words is more heinous.

“There cannot be any harsher words than this which portraits all working women coming up in life are sacrificing their chasity. The future of such working women is at stake.

Instead of wiping out the wrong impression about working women among the public these words create fear and anxiety among people who want to pursue a career.

After seeing these forwarded words from a person who is popular and has lot of connections with media people for long, the public will look at every working women with a suspicious eye”

The Court also observed that women should be encouraged to come up in life because those words are not just on a single person but against a gender and a women means a family

“If what is being practiced, no women will come forward to enter into public life. He has only regretted for forwarding but he has not denied what is said in the message. As claimed by him what awareness this message creates in public is?”, asked the Court.

Read Judgment Here

Got Something To Say:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


  • Ramasami Venkatesan says:

    This is only a forward, intentionally or inadvertently. Tamil Poet’s comment, all women bearing that Goddess name are ridiculed or defamed in public. How is he going to be viewed by Law of the land.

  • BharathiKumar,Consumer Activist says:

    Will this order apply to a Tamil Poet who made derogatory comments on a GODESS a year back

  • AJIT PAVGI says:

    When rahul gandhi openly blaming PM what action police or court is taking ?
    In a smaller circle of friends if some views are being circulated it is yo be taken as right of expression .
    This is nothing but threatening small people in society who are not knowledgeable about the law
    And expressing views against judgement is crime
    Hence keep shut your mouth and tolerate all abuse because you are a common man in the lower category of society .

  • Moorthy says:

    This society is biased on passing remarks about caste. Be it men or women. If we call a person relating to a caste which is reserved, its a crime. If we do the same on forward caste, its not a crime. How would you justify or vouchsafe this?? Does the constitution guarantees this?

  • Roma Wani says:

    A perfect judgement that actually is implying that our behaviour needs to be kept in check and abusive language must not be used or encouraged, be it towards women or men.
    Mankind is so stressed these days that our behaviour is unbecoming of human beings and the judiciary has taken it upon itself to guide us – shame!
    What happened to moral science books?

  • B L Tiwari says:

    Why politicians are exempt from this. They use abusive language like चार, नीच etc for prime minister, why no action is taken against them

  • Vivek Shelgaonkar says:

    “No one has any right to abuse women and if done it is a violation of rights..” How about abusing men?

  • Bejay sarcar says:

    For giving the false commitment/ assurance
    to the Indian people in the open public meeting by the political leaders, our supreme court must act on the same issue ,so that all types of misconduct by the people will be automatically reduced.

  • MNRao says:

    If I record a TV interview or statements made by personalities in TV programmes and forward such shots to friends or groups, will it be also punishable in case the recorder TV programme is derogatory to certain people or community ? Or if I click newspaper reports and send them, will be also a crime? If such things are crimes, who should be punished- me or the media or the TV ?