“Judiciary Has Broad Shoulders To Take On Any Criticism”: Madras HC While Quashing Criminal Case Against Political Commentator Badri Seshadri

It was alleged that in an interview conducted by a YouTube channel, Seshadri had made certain comments demeaning the status of the CJI. Based on the complaint of an advocate who viewed the interview, a case was registered for the offences under Section 153 (giving provocation with intent to cause riot), 153A(promoting enmity), and 505(1)(b) (public mischief) of the IPC.

Justice Anand Venkatesh, who was hearing a plea by Seshadri for quashing the criminal proceedings, observed that the judiciary has very broad shoulders to take on criticism unless they directly interfered with the administration of justice.

The court also said that Seshadri’s comments had to be looked at from the context in which it was made and though he used some expressions which seemed like a verbal attack on the CJI, he had later filed an affidavit in court expressing regret for such statement.

“The petitioner might have gone overboard while making certain comments about the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India. However, the comments made by the petitioner must be looked at, from the context in which such comments were made. According to the petitioner, the judiciary must not poke its nose on the functions that are exclusively within the domain of the executive. While expressing this view, the petitioner used certain expressions which were seemingly a verbal attack made on the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India. In the light of the affidavit filed by the petitioner, expressing regret for the statement made by him, this Court is of the considered view that the curtains must be drawn,” the court said.

The court had previously asked Seshadri to file an affidavit regretting the statement. Following this, he filed an affidavit saying that the statements made in the speech were in response to an impromptu question and were never made with the intention to mock, insult, insinuate, defame or damage the Indian Judiciary or the CJI. He added that the statements were read out of context or misinterpreted to draw an adverse interpretation. He further submitted that his intention was only to highlight the importance of separation of powers and apologized for the statements.

Though the Additional Public Prosecutor argued that the statements made by Seshadri amounted to hate speech and brought down the status of the CJI, the court observed that no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings. The court also asked Seshadri to be more careful while expressing himself on a public platform and not to repeat such instances in the future.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.M.R.Venkatesh for Mr.Ramaswamy Meyyappan

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr A.Damodaran Additional Public Prosecutor for R1

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 284

Case Title: Mr Badhrisheshathiri v State

Case No: Crl.O.P No.20889 of 2023