Mohan C. Lazarus v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29/03/2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.17723, 17731, 17742, 17884, 17887, 17891, 17903, 17911, 17939, 17943, 17956, 17960, 17986 and 18457 of 2019 and Crl.MP(MD)Nos.10435, 10438, 10440, 10497, 10498, 10501, 10510, 10517, 10544, 10557, 10559, 10560, 10569, 10576 and 10836 of 2019 of 2019 (1)Crl.OP(MD)No.17723 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikkanal Police Station, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.124 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.S.Tamilvannan : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 124 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mr.M.Vivek Kumar 1/21
(2)Crl.OP(MD)No.17731 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Boothapandi Police Station, Kanyakumari District.
(Crime No.274 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.Karthik : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 274 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : No appearance (3)Crl.OP(MD)No.17742 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Kovilpatti East Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
(Crime No.498 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.S.Sudhakaran : R2/De-facto complainant 2/21
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 498 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : No appearance (4)Crl.OP(MD)No.17884 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikkanal Police Station, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.124 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.Bala : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 272 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mr.K.M.Karunakaran 3/21
(5)Crl.OP(MD)No.17887 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikkanal Police Station, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.124 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.S.Venkatesan : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 488 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : No appearance (6)Crl.OP(MD)No.17891 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Town North Police Station, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.882 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.R.Krishnamoorthy : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 882 of 2018 and quash the same.
4/21
For Petitioner : Mr.Issacc Mohanlan Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mr.E.Ashok Kumar Ram (7)Crl.OP(MD)No.17903 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Sattur Town Police Station, Virudhunagar.
(Crime No.567 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.K.Kalaiarasan : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 567 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issacc Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mr.G.Kalidoss 5/21
(8)Crl.OP(MD)No.17911 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District.
(Crime No.619 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.N.Guruji Ramachandran : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 619 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy (9)Crl.OP(MD)No.17939 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Suchindram Police Station, Kanyakumari District.
(Crime No.366 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.R.Krishnan : R2/De-facto complainant 6/21
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 366 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mr.K.Gokul (10)Crl.OP(MD)No.17943 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
(Crime No.737 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.S.Jeyakodi Alias Balasubramanian : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 737 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlai Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mrs.S.Bharathi 7/21
(11)Crl.OP(MD)No.17956 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Melavalavu Police Station, Madurai District.
(Crime No.216 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.A.Senthil Moorthy : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 216 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy (12)Crl.OP(MD)No.17960 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Kelavalavu Police Station, Madurai District.
(Crime No.265 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.M.Sakthimuthu : R2/De-facto complainant 8/21
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 265 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy (13)Crl.OP(MD)No.17986 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikkannal Police Station, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.316 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.Raja : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 316 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlal Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : No appearance 9/21
(14)Crl.OP(MD)No.18457 of 2019:- Mohan C.Lazarus : Petitioner/Accused Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Kottampatti Police Station, Madurai District.
(Crime No.407 of 2018) : R1/Complainant 2.A.Senthil Moorthy : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No. 407 of 2018 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Issaac Mohanlan Senior Counsel for Mr.K.Samidurai For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd Respondent : Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy COMMON ORDER These criminal original petitions are filed seeking quashment of the cases in Crime Nos.124, 274, 498, 272, 448, 882, 567, 619, 366, 737, 216, 265, 316 and 407 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent.
10/21
2.The issue has arisen like this:- The petitioner is the founder of Jesus Redeems Ministry and the Leader of Evangelist of India, running a Trust for about forty years without any complaint. In this situation, the 2nd respondent in all the cases, has filed a complaint stating that the petitioner alleged to have defied and insulted the Hindu Gods stating that the temples are abodes of Satan; Among the cities of India, Tamil Nadu is abound with Satans, especially Kumbakonam area is having more Satans. Seeking action against the petitioner, cases have been registered as stated above.
3.The petitioner alleged to have insulted the Hindu Gods and spread massages in the social media that Hindu Gods are Satans. If they do worshiping, it will be sin, all the Hindu temples should be removed. The Christian community people must start working for that purpose. 4.Based upon the complaints, these cases have been registered.
5.When these petitions came up for hearing, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in a batch of criminal original petitions, 11/21
which were filed by several persons against the petitioner were dealt by the Principal Seat in Crl.OP Nos.26841 of 2018 batch etc., and a common order was passed, on 05/02/2021. In the course of the above said proceedings, an affidavit was filed by the petitioner, which is also extracted verbatimly in the order. In the above said affidavit, the petitioner has expressed his regret for the instances. He has also undertaken that no such instance will happen any more. Based upon the undertaking affidavit, the cases registered against the petitioner before various police stations and the cases filed before the various courts came to be quashed by the above said order. So the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the cause of action in all matters are one and the same, the remaining cases should not be kept pending, so these are also liable to be quashed.
6.At the time of argument, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that against the undertaking given by this petitioner before the Principal Seat, continuously, repeated the very same insult and he has not corrected himself.
12/21
7.On hearing this, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner sought time to get instructions with regard to the specific allegation. On that ground, the matter was adjourned. He has submitted that no such instance was recorded, after filing of the affidavit before the Principal Seat. But however, the learned counsel(s) appearing for the 2nd respondent repeated the very same allegation. If the petitioner committed recurrent instant insult against the affidavit that has been filed before the Principal Seat, certainly he is liable to be proceeded in accordance with law for contempt. So such liberty is always available to the complainant(s). 8.In the light of the rival submission, let us go back to the proceedings of the Principal Seat.
When the matter was taken up for hearing, on 02/02/2021, a common affidavit came to be filed by the petitioner. The relevant portions in the affidavit are extracted as under:- "1.
published throughout the State by way of video records and those statements had allegedly wounded the religious feelings and sentiments of the Hindus.
2.At the outset, I express my deep regret and sincere remorse for giving room for such kind of an incident which wounded the feelings and sentiments of the Hindu population. I never intended to create such impressions in the minds of anyone, much less the Hindu people. Some of my words uttered privately to a few people in a chamber at Avadi in Chennai on 18.03.2016 have been wantonly published and calculatingly circulated in truncated forms with the malevolent aim of tarnishing my name and image and disrupting the missionary service I am involved in.
3.I make it immensely clear that it was never my intention to defy either the sacred places of Hindus or their Gods or any other faith for that matter. Yet, I feel with much remorse that my words had led to such kind of impressions among the Hindus. I assure that I would take adequate care so as to avoid such occurrences in future.
14/21
4.I also wish to state that no sooner such allegations surface, I did send letter to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kurumbur Police Station, Thoothukudi, dated 02.10.2018 (copy enclosed) clearly stating that I did not make any such statements intending to offend or would the religious sentiments of anyone. I also released a video clipping dated 03.10.2018 expressing the same. I again reiterate my regrets. I would ensure such instances do not happen anymore."
9.After going through the affidavit, this court was of the view that the petitioner has realised the consequence of his reckless statement.
10.It is further observed that the petitioner has wholeheartedly tendered pardon with an undertaking that he will abstain from such conduct in future. Further expressing, by reposing faith upon the petitioner and his true intention and goodwill in the affairs, went on to observe and directed the parties not to precipitate the matter any further, since the issue involves religious sentiments; directed the parties to act upon the affidavit. 15/21
11.In this aspect, what is required to be maintained is the human values, which is loosely defined as under:- "Human values are the virtues that guide us to take into account the human element when we interact with other human beings.
Human values are, for example, respect, acceptance, consideration, appreciation, listening, openness, affection, empathy and love towards other human beings.
It is with those human values that one becomes truly able to put into practice his/her ethical values, such as justice, integrity, refusal of violence and ban to kill even in a crisis situation, Human values convey a positive and affective surge, which reinforces the rationale of moral values. They are the values that permit us to live together in harmony, and personality contribute to peace. Human values are a tool to manage human relations and a tool for peace when the tension is high."
16/21
12.The last sentence assumes importance here. Human value matters much more above the law, much above the religion. But these things cannot be preached by this Court to the people like the petitioner. He has to maintain it at any cost, in any situation and in any event.
13.Certainly, the de-facto complainant is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law by way of filing the contempt petition. So, such a liberty is always available to the complainant. Even suo motu action can be taken, if any such act has been brought to the court subsequent to the above said undertaking, since the subject matter of the complaints, which are dealt in the batch of criminal original petitions are one and the same in respect of the criminal original proceedings. I am afraid that the court can take different view on the ground of subsequent development.
14.As mentioned earlier, remedy is always available to the 2nd respondent(s)/complainant(s) to prosecute the petitioner for violating the undertaking. But as mentioned earlier, when a portion of the cause of action, which arose within the jurisdiction of the Principal Seat, has been quashed, this court cannot take a different view. Since the 17/21
subject in the batch matters are one and the same, I am of the considered view that the petitions are liable to be allowed.
15.In the result, all the criminal original petitions are allowed. The impugned FIRs in Crime Nos.124, 274, 498, 272, 448, 882, 567, 619, 366, 737, 216, 265, 316 and 407 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent are herein quashed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
29.03.2022 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No er Note:
In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
18/21
To, 1.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikkanal Police Station, Dindigul District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Boothapandi Police Station, Kanyakumari District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Kovilpatti East Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
4.The Inspector of Police, Town North Police Station, Dindigul District.
5.The Inspector of Police, Sattur Town Police Station, Virudhungar.
6.The Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, Madurai District.
7.The Inspector of Police, Suchindram Police Station, Kanyakumari District.
8.The Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
9.The Inspector of Police, Melavalavu Police Station, Madurai District.
10.The Inspector of Police, Kelavalavu Police Station, Madurai District.
19/21
11.The Inspector of Police, Kottampatti Police Station, Madurai District.
12.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
20/21
G.ILANGOVAN,J., er Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.17723, 17731, 17742, 17884, 17887, 17891, 17903, 17911, 17939, 17943, 17956, 17960, 17986 and 18457 of 2019 29/03/2022 21/21