Court rules expression of opinion not intended to promote enmity, FIR quashed following affidavit of realization and assurance.
In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court's Madurai Bench, presided over by Justice R. Vijayakumar, quashed an FIR against M. Barani Dharan, a law student who faced criminal charges due to a controversial Facebook post. The Court's decision, delivered on March 4, 2026, underscores the importance of distinguishing between harmful actions and the exercise of free speech.
The petitioner, M. Barani Dharan, was embroiled in legal proceedings after he posted on Facebook suggesting the removal of a statue of E.V.R. Periyar, situated in front of the Srirangam Temple, claiming it affected religious sentiments. The post led to the registration of an FIR under Sections 153A, 504, and 505 of the Indian Penal Code, which pertain to promoting enmity between groups and provoking breach of peace.
During the proceedings, Barani Dharan submitted an affidavit expressing his realization of the mistake, stating it was unintentional, and assured the court of his commitment not to repeat such actions. He emphasized the adverse impact the case would have on his budding legal career, noting his current enrollment in a law program at Soundarya College of Law, Bengaluru.
Justice Vijayakumar acknowledged that the Facebook post was merely an expression of opinion, and with no untoward incidents resulting from it, the allegations of promoting enmity were found unsubstantiated. The court emphasized the importance of context, noting that the petitioner was a law student at the time, and he has since completed his studies and is preparing to enter the legal profession.
In light of these considerations, the court concluded that proceeding with the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the FIR registered in Crime No. 2182 of 2023 was quashed, and the connected miscellaneous petition was also closed.
The ruling highlights the judiciary's role in protecting freedom of expression while ensuring that such rights are not misconstrued as incitement of enmity, thus setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.
Bottom Line:
Quashing of FIR - FIR quashed considering affidavit filed by petitioner expressing realization of mistake and undertaking not to repeat such actions in future - Facebook post expressing opinion cannot be considered as promoting enmity between groups in absence of untoward incidents.
Statutory provision(s):
153A, 504, 505(1)(b), 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
M.Barani Dharan v. State of Tamil Nadu, (Madras)(Madurai Bench) : Law Finder Doc id # 2876040
