HC rejects pre-arrest bail plea of actor accused in ‘hate speech’ case
During the hearing, justice N Anand Venkatesh of the Madurai bench of the Madras high court said: “The speech made by the petitioner clearly hovers around hate speech.”
Chennai: The Madras high court on Thursday dismissed the anticipatory bail application filed by actor Kasturi (who goes only by a first name) for a case filed against her for making derogatory remarks against the Telugu speaking community in Tamil Nadu.
During the hearing, justice N Anand Venkatesh of the Madurai bench of the Madras high court said: “The speech made by the petitioner clearly hovers around hate speech.”
He further said: “On carefully considering the controversial statement made by the petitioner, it is seen that the petitioner has described the Telugu speaking people as the ones who came to Tamil Nadu to serve the wives and concubines living in quarters reserved for them (Andhapuram) of a King.”
“It is true that the controversial statement which has now caused confusion does not directly attribute anything against the womenfolk belonging to the community. However, this statement made by the petitioner has painted all Telugu speaking people in a bad light,” he added.
The Madurai police had filed an FIR against Kasturi, who identifies as a social activist and political commentator besides being an actor, for her speech on November 3 at a Brahmin’s meet.
“Freedom of speech is a fundamental right that empowers individuals to express their thoughts, beliefs and opinions,” the justice said. “However, with this power comes great responsibility. The ability to speak freely should not be misused to spread hatred or cause communal disharmony.”
“It is essential to recognise the impact our words can have on individuals and communities, and to use our voices to uplift rather than demean…Everyone must be more conscious while uttering a word from a public platform and must necessarily face the consequence if irresponsible statements bordering hate speech are made,” Venkatesh said.
The petitioner contended that the allegations made in the complaint was a clear misunderstanding. She said that she did not make any allegations against the womenfolk and it was twisted to suit the needs of the vested interest. The state responded that her speech was intentionally directed against a particular community and if such speech is permitted, it will cause communal disharmony and hatred among two communities.
After hearing both sides, the court said that the petitioner’s speech which is now a permanent record on social media “can act like a ticking bomb, which will wait to burst at the appropriate point of time by creating violence as among the Tamil and Telugu speaking people.”
Kasturi had apologised after the video became viral and controversial. But, the court observed that when a person who has said something that borders hate speech is caught, tendering an apology is a way to escape and courts cannot entertain that.
“On carefully reading the message that was tweeted by the petitioner, there is no genuine attempt to apologise for using such a bad and intemperate language and the petitioner is only attempting to justify her speech,” the justice said.
“In cases of this nature, the larger public interest will weigh in the minds of the Court. The petitioner claims to be an educated and public spirited person but what has fallen out of the mouth of the petitioner is highly pejorative,” the justice said. “Courts must be more stringent when such demeaning statements are made by such persons since they are setting a bad role model for others to follow.”
At the meeting, Kasthuri made derogatory comments on Telugu-speaking people settled in Tamil Nadu while trying to take a dig at DMK ministers with Telugu lineage. “The speeches must not be made to play to the gallery and more responsibility must be shown,” the court said.
“The petitioner probably was able to get the applause when she made this speech but what she had spoken had actually affected the sentiments of the Telugu speaking people…In a diverse country like ours, there must be zero tolerance whenever such speech is made by demeaning or insulting particular group of people based on their language.”
Recommended Topics