The Kerala High Court in the case Rajeev Chandrasekhar v State of Kerala observed and has ordered that no coercive action shall be taken against Union Minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar for allegedly making provocative remarks and causing the religious disharmony in the State after the Kalamaserry bomb blasts.
The bench headed by Justice C.S. Dias i.e., the Special Judge of MP/MLA in the case observed and has issued an interim order directing that no coercive steps shall be taken against the Minister till December 14, 2023.
The counsel, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani appearing for the Minister argued before the court that he had not spoken any words or statements to promote hatred or religious disharmony in the state, nor had he committed any illegal acts to cause rioting.
In the present case, the two separate petitions were moved by the Minister before Court today for quashing two FIRs registered against him where he was made the sole accused on the grounds alleging commission of offences as stated under section 153, the giving provocation with intent to cause riot, section 153A, promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion of the Indian Penal Code reading with section 120 (o), the penalty for causing nuisance and violation of public order of the Kerala Police Act.
The court stated that the allegations were made against Minister Rajeev was that he posted provocative remarks through his social media page following the recent Kalamaserry bomb blasts which took place on October 29.
It was also alleged before the court that the Minister on his Facebook page posted allegedly ‘provocative remarks’ on ‘Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’ causing disruption of religious harmony in the state.
Therefore, the plea moved by the Minister stated that he was only concerned that the State government was not taking any action against radical groups such as ‘Hamas’ due to its ‘appeasement politics’ in the state and was taking a passive approach.
Adding to it, he stated that he had he had only expressed his concerns after the Kalamaserry bomb blasts for maintaining law and order in the state.
Further, the plea moved stated that the registration of FIR against him was nothing but malicious prosecution and that he had not made any statements with reference to any particular religious community.
The petitioner in the plea stated that he unfairly targeted with ulterior intentions and FIRs were registered against him and further proceedings in Crime No. 3408/2023 and 3418/2023 have to be quashed.
The counsel, Advocates Santhosh Mathew, Anil Sebastian Pulickel, Abi Benny Areckal, Mathew Nevin Thomas, Shinto Mathew Abraham, Kurian Anthony Mathew, Joe S. Adhikaram appeared for the petitioner.
