Madras HC quashes hate speech complaint against VCK president & MP Thol. Thirumavalavan

‘Spoke what was written in Manusmriti & in general parlance’; Madras HC quashes hate speech complaint against VCK president & MP Thol. Thirumavalavan for comments on Hindu women

“What has been stated in the book “Manusmriti” had been only made as his speech and in the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court does not find that any of the offences as alleged by the complainant is made out.”

Madras High Court: In a petition filed by Thol. Thirumavalavan, the President of the political party Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) and Member of Parliament, under Section 482 ¹ of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 forquashing of a private complaint filed against him under Sections 120-B ², 295-A ³, 298 ⁴, 500 ⁵, 509 ⁶ of the Penal Code, 1860 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, for a speech he gave regarding Hindu women, pending before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur (‘DJM’), the Single Judge Bench of P. Velmurugan, J., while quashing the complaint, held that Thirumavalavan only spoke what was written in the book Manusmriti and in general parlance, thus, prima facie no case was made out against him under the alleged offences.

Background

Thirumavalavan contended that on 27-09-2020, he participated in an online international conference, wherein he delivered his speech on the topic of ‘Periyar & Indian Politics’. In his speech, he spoke about how women were mentioned in the book ‘Manu Smriti’. Thereafter, a video of this speech was uploaded by the co-accused on the YouTube channel named ‘Periyar TV’.

He further contended that thereafter, a private complaint was filed before the DJM by the complainant-respondent alleging that, in the aforesaid video, Thirumavalavan had uttered words that lowered the image of Hindu women in public and humiliated the feelings of Hindu women with the help of his co-accused, which amounted to hate speech. Upon taking cognizance of the complaint, the DJM issued summons to Thirumavalavan.

Aggrieved, he filed the present petition stating that his speech was based on Manusmriti and its Tamil-translated version, thus, he could not be found guilty of the alleged offences.

Analysis

The Court noted that the main allegation made by the complainant was that the speech given by Thirumavalavan was telecasted via the YouTube channel and thus amounted to hate speech against Indian women, particularly Hindu women.

Upon perusal of the materials on record, the Court stated that it was conspicuously clear that Thirumavalavan referred to and spoke about the book Manusmriti. Thus, the Court found that Thirumavalavan did not commit any of the offences alleged against him.

Considering that whatever had been stated in the book was said in the speech and facts and circumstances of the case, the Court held that it did not find any of the alleged offences made out since, prima facie, nothing was available on record to prosecute the complaint. The Court further stated that there was no intention of Thirumavalavan to commit hate speech, and he did not affect anyone as his speech was in general parlance.

Thus, the petition was allowed, and the complaint on the file of the DJM was quashed.

[Thol. Thirumavalavan v. Dr. V. Vedha, Criminal Original Petition (MD) No. 9663 of 2024, decided on 21-12-2024]

Advocate who appeared in this case :

For the petitioner: S. Deepika