Madras High Court quashes hate speech case against VCK Chief Thol Thirumavalavan |
[12/05, 08:22] sekarreporter1: Madras High Court quashes hate speech case against VCK Chief Thol Thirumavalavan | https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/madras-high-court-quashes-hate-speech-case-against-vck-chief-thol-thirumavalavan
[12/05, 08:22] Meta AI: *Madras HC quashes hate speech case against VCK Chief Thol. Thirumavalavan*
*Justice AD Jagadish Chandira | April 29, 2026 | Published May 11, 2026*
*1. What was the case?*
*Speech*: Nov 9, 2019 at Kamban Kaviyarangam, Puducherry. VCK event opposing _“Sanatana-based education policy”_.
*Complaint*: Hindu Munnani functionary Kannan alleged Thirumavalavan made remarks _“insulting Hindu deities and hurting Hindu religious sentiments”_.
*Charges filed*: IPC 153B – prejudicial to national integration, 295A – outraging religious feelings, 298 – wounding religious feelings, 504 – insult to provoke breach of peace. d6e7
*2. Why HC quashed it – 2 fatal defects*
1. *Limitation expired*: FIR in 2019, but _final report/chargesheet filed only on Oct 30, 2025_. Law mandates filing within *3 years* for offences punishable up to 3 years.
2. *No prior sanction*: For IPC 153B & 295A, _Section 196(1A) CrPC_ requires Central/State Govt sanction before court can take cognizance. Police filed without it. e21e
> _“Ergo, on the aforesaid grounds, the impugned proceedings is liable to be quashed and it is accordingly quashed in its entirety”_ e21e
*3. What Thirumavalavan actually said*
HC noted he was *referring to Manusmriti* and speaking about how women are described in it. d43f
In a separate 2020 online conference case also quashed: He was speaking on _“Periyar and Indian Politics”_ and quoted Manusmriti – _“did not utter any word lowering the modesty of any woman other than what was written in Manu Smriti”_. 4d8f
*Court*: _“There was no intention for Thirumavalavan to commit hate speech… his speech is only in general parlance”_. 655d
*4. Pattern: This is the 2nd case quashed*
1. *2020 online conference case*: Quashed by Justice P Velmurugan – held he _“only said what was stated in Manusmriti”_.
2. *2019 Puducherry case*: Now quashed for limitation + no sanction. 4d8f
*5. Legal takeaways*
1. *Procedural safeguards matter*: Hate speech cases u/s 153A/295A need govt sanction. Police can’t bypass.
2. *Limitation*: Can’t sit on FIRs for 6 years. Chargesheet must come in 3 years.
3. *Context of speech*: Quoting religious texts in political critique ≠ 295A if no _“deliberate and malicious intention”_.
*Political context May 2026*: VCK is ally of DMK. With TVK’s Vijay now CM and floor test on May 13, quashing of case against a key Dalit leader removes a distraction for the anti-BJP front.
Want the full text of _Section 196(1A) CrPC_ or difference between 153A, 153B, 295A?
