Poll speech not an excuse tomalign any individual: HC

Bengaluru: A rally held during or after elections is no excuse to get away by making statements maligning any individual, the Karnataka high court observed recently.
Justice M Nagaprasanna made this observation while refusing to quash the proceedings against Sunil Kumar, BJP MLA from Karkala constituency, in a defamation case registered against him by Sri Rama Sene leader Pramod Muthalik.
In the 2023 assembly election, Muthalik had contested as an independent against Sunil Kumar and lost. At a rally organised to celebrate the victory a day after the results, Sunil Kumar alleged the Sri Rama Sene leader had a role in the killings of Hindus in the name of the Tiger Gang.
Muthalik filed a private complaint for defamation, and on March 20, 2024, the special court for elected representatives at Bengaluru took cognizance of the case against Sunil Kumar.
Challenging the same, Sunil Kumar argued that the statements made during elections cannot be taken as defamation as it was a statement made in a public rally. He further claimed that even Muthalik had made several statements against him, and he has ignored all of them on the ground that they were made during the election rally.
On the other hand, Muthalik argued the allegations are not only untrue but also have dented his reputation built over a period of 40 years. He claimed that he is neither associated with the Tiger Gang nor has been jailed for any murder.
After perusing the materials on record, Justice Nagaprasanna noted that Sunil Kumar's remarks are a matter for trial. "It is no doubt true that dissent is the essence of democracy but that would not mean that the maker of a statement can get away with any statement in the garb of it being made during an election rally or in a post-election rally," he said.
"Making a speech in public against someone would come to be known to each and every one. In this digital age, anything spoken does not remain with the person who speaks it. It is circulated within no time. In the garb of dissent being the essence of democracy, the speeches should not malign the character of any person unless it is borne out by facts. The subject crime has to be tried, and trial is inevitable," the judge further observed while dismissing Sunil Kumar's petition.
MSID:: 113549765 413 |