FIR Against Priya Prakash Varrier Quashed: Supreme Court Rules on Free Speech

The case of Priya Prakash Varrier & Ors. vs. The State of Telangana & Anr. revolved around a controversy over a song in the film Oru Adaar Love. The petitioners—actor Priya Prakash Varrier, the film’s producer, and its director—approached the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution, seeking the quashing of an FIR registered under Section 295A IPC.

Background of the Case

The FIR was filed by a complainant alleging that the picturization of the song “Manikya Malaraya Poovi” offended the religious sentiments of a particular community. The complaint was registered under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, which penalizes deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings.

Arguments Presented

Petitioners’ Argument

• The song in question had been sung in Kerala since 1978 and was a traditional Muslim folk song from the Malabar region.
• The song’s picturization, which included a now-famous wink by Priya Prakash Varrier, was merely a part of creative expression.
• The FIR amounted to an attack on artistic freedom and free speech.
• The song had been widely available on platforms like YouTube and did not incite any law and order disturbances.

Respondents’ Stand

• The complainant argued that the manner in which the song was picturized insulted religious sentiments.
• The State of Telangana, however, had no major objections and left it to the court’s discretion.

Supreme Court’s Verdict

The Supreme Court ruled that Section 295A IPC was not applicable to the case. The judgment noted:

“On a keen scrutiny of Section 295A and the view expressed by the Constitution Bench in Ramji Lal Modi (supra), we do not find that the said provision would be attracted in the present case. We are inclined to think so, for the picturization of the said song solely because of the ‘wink’ would not tantamount to an insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of a class of citizens.”

The court emphasized that the FIR appeared to be an attempt to gain attention rather than a genuine concern.

Legal Implications

The ruling reaffirmed the principle that artistic expression is protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The court cited past judgments, including Manohar Lal Sharma vs. Sanjay Leela Bhansali and Mahendra Singh Dhoni vs. Yerraguntla Shyamsundar, where it had quashed FIRs filed under Section 295A for lack of malicious intent.

Conclusion

This judgment is a significant milestone in safeguarding creative freedom in India. It establishes that merely expressing an artistic perspective, even if it includes elements that some may find controversial, does not amount to a criminal offense unless there is clear, deliberate intent to incite hatred or violence.

Petitioner Name: Priya Prakash Varrier & Ors..
Respondent Name: The State of Telangana & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice Dipak Misra, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud.
Place Of Incident: Telangana.
Judgment Date: 31-08-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Priya Prakash Varrie vs The State of Telanga Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 31-08-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Criminal Defamation
See all petitions in Judgment by Dipak Misra
See all petitions in Judgment by A M Khanwilkar
See all petitions in Judgment by Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments August 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category