Madras High Court quashes sedition FIR against YouTuber Maridhas over tweets on IAF chopper crash

The Madras High Court has quashed the First Information Report (FIR) against YouTuber M Maridhas, who was booked for the offence of sedition for his social media posts on the recent Indian Air Force (IAF) helicopter crash in Coonoor which killed Chief of Defence Staff, General Bipin Rawat and thirteen others [M. Maridoss v. State]..Single judge Justice GR Swaminathan quashed the FIR and observed that even a Youtuber would be entitled to the very same right which courts accord to journalists and media under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution which lays down freedom of speech and expression. 'Youtuber' or any social media personality regularly commenting on public affairs would also be entitled to the very same rights which are accorded to journalists and the media under Article 19(1)(a)," the Court held.In his social media post, Maridhas had questioned whether Tamil Nadu, under DMK rule was turning into another Kashmir.The tweet was made in the light certain people expressing elation over the chopper crash and the death of General Rawat.Maridhas expressed his apprehension that if the environment is conducive to breed such anti-national groups, then, there is a possibility of any conspiracy of humongous proportions being hatched. He, therefore, demanded that the secessionist forces should be suppressed.He was later booked under Sections 124A (Sedition), 153A (promoting enmity between different groups), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace).The counsel for petitioner submitted that Maridhas had only voiced his concern and opinion and, being a well-known critic of the government, he was arrested only to be silenced.On the other hand, Additional Advocate General, Veera Kathiravan argued that comparison drawn by the petitioner with Kashmir was unwarranted.He submitted that by alleging that the State government is supporting the separatists, Maridhas had made a conscious effort to instigate his followers to react violently so that a duly elected government can be toppled..'Youtuber' or any social media personality regularly commenting on public affairs would also be entitled to the very same rights which are accorded to journalists and the media under Article 19(1)(a)"Madras High Court.The Court said that through his post, the petitioner had merely vented out his anxiety and his tweet cannot be characterized as seditious. It also said that the tweet was never intended to subvert the government. On the contrary, it called for strengthening the 'foundations of government', the Court noted.While discussing every charge which was levelled against Maridhas in the FIR, the Court concluded that the FIR was illegal and no charge was made out against him and quashed the FIR."Before concluding, I cannot resist commenting on a comical feature of the impugned complaint. The defacto complainant had stated that as a result of the offending tweet, there will be hatred and enmity between the DMK partymen and the separatists. Maridoss may call it a Freudian slip. I will not be so uncharitable. The defacto complainant must have drafted his complaint in a hurry for reasons best known to him. The very registration of the impugned FIR is illegal. It stands quashed.".The Court in its order also referred to how Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk differentiated between a naive and sentimental novelist."The naive write spontaneously almost without thinking, not bothering to consider the intellectual and ethical consequences of their words and paying any attention to what others might say," the Court said.While referring to petitioner's social media post, the Court said that he appeared to have made a “naive” Tweet in the Pamukian sense. Probably realising it, he took it down. The State can step in only if the petitioner's act falls foul of law and not otherwise, the Court underscored..[Read Order]