Kerala HC refuses to quash criminal case against ex-plantation worker who set up placard claiming Endosulfan tragedy was a hoax [Read Order]

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday refused to quash criminal proceedings against a person who went to the Kerala Chief Minister's meeting with endosulfan tragedy survivors with a placard describing reports of the health implications of the pesticide as false..Gangadharan Nair, the petitioner and a former employee of the Plantation Corporation of India who supposedly worked with the pesticide, was chargsheeted by the police before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Kasargode under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code, for wantonly or malignantly provoking a riot by his act. Nair was also accused of violating the Kerala Prevention of Disturbances of Public Meetings Act, 1961..After the Supreme Court directed the formulation of a scheme to give compensation to victims whose health was affected by the pesticide, the petitioner made claims that no scientific method was adopted to discern whether any calamity was actually created by the use of Endosulfan. .The petitioner levelled allegations that false claims regarding Endosulfan were being made to diminish the crops of the plantation factory he worked at and to create market changes. He alleged that people suffering from other health problems were fraudulently listed as Endosulfan victims. The provision of compensation to Endosulfan victims would result in looting of public funds, he declared. .With these claims, he went with a placard to a meeting between the Chief Minister and the victims. .The placard, loosely translated from malayalam, stated that there was no menace related to the use of Endosulfan in the Kasargode district and that the corruption under the guise of such an issue and the misuse of State funds should stop.. In carrying out this demonstration, Nair stated that he was exercising his right to free speech..Rejecting his plea to quash the FIR registered over the incident, the Bench of Justice MR Anitha pointed out that the offence punishable by Section 153, IPC did not require a riot to actually take place. .Even causing a provocation with the intent or with the knowledge that the act was likely to spark unrest would attract Section 153, IPC, she emphasized. Relying on Ratanlal and Dhirajlal's Commentary on Section 153 of the Penal Code, Justice Anitha explained that:.a Malignant act would be an unlawful act done intentionally without just cause or excuse,a Wanton act would describe any reckless or thoughtless act without anyregard for right or consequences. This was much wider than a malignant act, she highlighted..In this case, Nair went with the placards to a meeting attended by Endosulfan victims who sought compensation. Their minds would definitely be thrown into unrest by his statements, she reasoned..Since the petitioner, who was well-versed with the chain of events, was likely to have known the possible consequences of his actions, his act was prima facie covered by the provision, the Court said. As noted in the judgment, ."... naturally the participants in the meeting would be the victims of endosulphan who have come in the list prepared by the authorities ... it cannot be forgotten that there would be persons who are eligible also would be participating in the meeting. So what would be their feeling on seeing such a placard with a writing that there is no such menace of Endosulphan in Kasargode district?"."So the act of the petitioner would prima facie amounts to a reckless or thoughtless act without any regard for the consequence. The possibility of the genuine victims of Endosulphan got provoked by seeing the placard cannot be ruled out prima facie."Justice MR Anitha.To the submission that he did not intend to spark a riot and was just exercising his right to free speech and expression, the Judge pointed out that maintenance of public order was a ground on which freedom of speech and expression could be restricted. .The Kerala Public Meetings Act aimed at controlling disorderly behaviour in public meetings and thus was a reasonable restriction on free speech, she observed. As noted in her judgment, ."So when the petitioner displays a placard containing the writings quoted above in a meeting held for distribution of compensation to the victims of endosulphan and that too at the time when the Chief Minister is making a speech in connection with the function, there won't be any doubt that the act of the petitioner/accused would cause confusion or disturbances of the normal working of mind of the victims who were assembled there prima facie. Whether the purpose of the petitioner was for preventing the transaction of the business for which meeting was called etc are matters to be proved during evidence.".For these reasons, Justice Anitha concluded that the FIR against Nair was not fit to be quashed, at least at the stage it presently was in..Nair's demonstration at the endosulfan victims meeting was following a supposed investigation he undertook into the victim compensation scheme prepared by the State Government. .According to him, politicians were using the scheme for illegal gratification. Apart from this, he claimed that reports about the health implications of the now-banned pesticide and the attribution of physical disorders to its use were a hoax. He stated that he has worked with the pesticide and that it has not harmed him in any way..Although it remarked that his concern about illegal profiting from the compensation scheme was legitimate, the Court took exception to his choice of venue for the demonstration..With the observation that Nair had failed to show that his case deserved to be quashed, the petition was dismissed..Advocates Shaijan C George and Sajitha George represented Nair, and Public Prosecutor CK Suresh argued for the State..Read the Order here: