Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
G. Veera Venkanna, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 30 September, 2021
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No.: Crl.P. No.5440 of 2021
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl. Office
DATE ORDER
No Note
1. 30.09.2021 CMR, J
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor takes notice
for the 1st respondent/State and requests time to obtain
instructions.
Issue notice to the 2nd respondent returnable in
four (4) weeks.
________
CMR, J
I.A.No.1 of 2021
The petitioner is A-5 in Crime No.115 of 2021 of
Addateegala Police Station, East Godavari District. The
de facto complainant, who is the M.L.A of
Rampachodavaram, lodged a report with the police
stating that a comment was made in the social media i.e.,
in Whatsapp group and Facebook against the Hon'ble
Chief Minister by resorting to morphing and the said
comment has caused loss of reputation of the de facto
complainant, who is a tribal woman and an M.L.A. It is
stated that the said comment is made to create dispute
between various groups. The said report was registered
as a case in the above crime for the offences punishable
under Sections 153A, 505(2) r/w 34 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that the contents of the F.I.R do not satisfy the
ingredients of the offences both under Sections 153A and
505(2) IPC. He would submit that in order to constitute
an offence under Section 153A IPC, the words either
spoken or written, or by signs or by visible
representations or otherwise, shall be made to promote
disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will
between two different religious, racial, language or
regional groups or castes or communities, on the ground
of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste
or community. He would submit that there is nothing to
indicate in the F.I.R that any comment was made on the
ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence,
language, caste or community with an intention to create
ill-will between religious, racial, language or regional
groups or castes or communities. Therefore, he would
submit that no case is made out under Section 153A IPC.
Similarly, it is contended that even to constitute
an offence under Section 505(2) IPC that the statement
must be made with intent to create or promote hatred or
ill-will between religious, racial, language or regional
groups or castes or communities on the ground of
religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or
community etc. Therefore, he would submit that the
contents of the F.I.R do not show that any such comment
was made on the ground of religion, race, place of birth,
residence, language, caste or community with an intent
to create any such ill-will between the said groups.
In support of his contention, he has also relied
on the judgment of this Court reported in 2020 SCC
OnLine AP 726 in the case of Kantamaneni Ravishankar
Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh wherein it is held at para
No.70 that the posting that was in the Youtube is only to
insult the Government and the present Chief Minister
and the Government and the Chief Minister cannot
constitute one group or two groups. Therefore, it does
not constitute an offence punishable under Section
505(2) IPC. At para 61 of the judgment, the judgment of
the Apex Court in "Bilal Ahmed Kaloo Vs. State of Andhra
Pradesh" was also referred stating that the Apex Court
drawn the distinction between Section 153A of IPC and
Section 505 (2) of I.P.C wherein it is held by the Apex
Court that the common ingredient in both the offences is
promoting feeling of enmity, hatred or ill-will between
different religious or racial or linguistic or regional
groups or castes or communities. Therefore, Section
153A covers a case where a person by words, either
spoken or written, or by signs or by visible
representations attempts to promote such feelings and
under Section 505(2) IPC, promotion of such feelings
should have been done by making and publishing or
circulating any statement or report containing rumor or
alarming news. Finally, this Court held that the facts of
the case do not constitute any offence under Section
153A or 505(2) IPC.
In view of the ingredients that are contemplated
under Section 153A and 505(2) IPC as discussed supra
and in view of the aforesaid judgment of this Court, the
petitioner could make out a strong prima facie case
warranting interference of this Court under Section 482
Cr.P.C to examine in the main Criminal Petition whether
launching of criminal prosecution against the petitioner
for the aforesaid two offences is legally sustainable or
not and whether the said F.I.R is liable to be set aside or
not.
Therefore, in view of the aforesaid discussion,
there shall be interim stay of further proceedings
pursuant to registration of F.I.R in Crime No.115 of 2021
of Addateegala Police Station, East Godavari District,
including taking coercive steps against the petitioner, till
the next date of hearing.
________
CMR, J
AKN
