SC: Public prosecutor not a ‘post office’ for cases against political opponents

The Bench accepted a submission by Vijaykanth’s counsel G S Mani that although the top court has upheld the validity of the criminal defamation law, people cannot be prosecuted for “fair criticism, discernment and dissection of activities of the state government and disapproval of views taken in the matters of administration and policy decisions.”

[related-post]

Watch Video: What’s making news

Mani submitted that besides raising questions over validity of the penal law on defamation, Vijaykanth has also raised questions over impartiality and objectivity of a public prosecutor when a political leader in power seeks registration of criminal cases against others solely because he is critical, or has a different opinion. “The office of the public prosecutor has its own independence and he has been conferred an independent role under the provisions of CrPC to examine all complaints and apply his mind before forwarding them to sessions judges for registration of FIRs,” said the counsel.

Mani urged that a sustained democracy is predicated fundamentally on the idea of criticism, dissent, and tolerance, and that a citizen’s right to criticise cannot be crushed by constant launching of criminal prosecution for defamation.

Representing the Centre, Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar said that the sanctioning authority — the state government in this case — also has a “significant and sacred role” under the pertinent provisions of CrPC and, therefore, “a complaint cannot be filed in a routine manner to harass a citizen.”

Finding favour with their arguments, the court agreed to examine Vijaykanth’s petition and sought formal replies from Jayalalithaa and the state government. It also asked the public prosecutor of Dharampuri district, who had lodged complaints against the DMDK chief for his speech at a public meeting in the district criticising the state government.

The next date of hearing has been fixed on August 24.