Madurai Bench of Madras HC dismisses actor Kasthuri’s anticipatory bail petition

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Thursday (November 14, 2024) dismissed a petition filed by actor S. Kasthuri seeking anticipatory bail. Ms. Kasthuri had moved the court fearing arrest by the Madurai Police for her alleged remarks against the Telugu community during an event in Chennai earlier this month.

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Thursday (November 14, 2024) dismissed a petition filed by actor S. Kasthuri seeking anticipatory bail. Ms. Kasthuri had moved the court fearing arrest by the Madurai Police for her alleged remarks against the Telugu community during an event in Chennai earlier this month.

The court said the speech made by the petitioner clearly hovered around hate speech. Dismissing the petition, Justice N. Anand Venkatesh observed that on carefully considering the controversial statement made by the petitioner, it was seen that she had described Telugu-speaking people as those who came to Tamil Nadu to serve the wives and courtesans of Tamil kings. She had then remarked that it was these people who were claiming to be Tamil, the court said.

The court observed that while it was true that the controversial statement, which has now caused confusion, did not directly attribute anything against the women from the community, the petitioner’s statement painted all Telugu-speaking people in a bad light.

The court observed that freedom of speech is a fundamental right that empowers individuals to express their thoughts, beliefs, and opinions. “However, with this power comes great responsibility. The ability to speak freely should not be misused to spread hatred or cause communal disharmony,” the court said. In the present case, the court would have to see the impact created by the speech on Telugu-speaking people.

“The speech made by the petitioner clearly hovers around hate speech. A speaker must always think twice before addressing such issues in a public platform, particularly in the social media era, since what is said becomes a permanent record,” the court observed.

The petitioner, perhaps, was able to get applause when she made the speech, but what she had said actually affected the sentiments of Telugu-speaking people. Even though the complaint said that the speech was directed against the women of the particular community, on careful listening, it is seen that all Telugu-speaking people have been demeaned, the court observed.

In a diverse country like ours, there must be zero tolerance whenever such a speech is made by demeaning or insulting a particular group of people based on their language, the court further said.