‘Crucial to depict sensitivity’: Madras High Court asks Tamil Nadu police to complete probe on FB post on Lord Krishna

Justice Shankar said that despite the seriousness of the allegations, the respondent police handled the case casually, halting the investigation and closing it as 'undetected'.

The Madras High Court has slammed Tamil Nadu Police for mechanically closing a criminal case registered over a Facebook post which allegedly contained vulgar captions posted with an image of Lord Krishna stealing clothes from gopis (female devotees).

The Madurai bench of the high court was hearing a criminal revision petition under Section 438 read with Section 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the new law replacing CrPC.

Setting aside the Magistrates’ order, the High Court has asked the police to resume and complete the investigation and file a final report in three months.

Justice K Murali Shankar said that the depiction of religious figures must be handled with due sensitivity and that the government must ensure that freedom of speech does not translate into hurting religious feelings.

"Depicting Hindu Gods in a disrespectful manner, intentionally hurting the sentiments of millions, cannot be justified. Such actions have the potential to spark enmity, religious outrage, social disorder, and undermine communal harmony, “ Justice Shankar wrote in the order dated August 4.

He further wrote, “Given the deep-rooted respect for religious symbols and deities, disrespect can lead to social unrest and hurt a large section of society. Therefore, it is crucial to approach such depictions with sensitivity. T

Justice Shankar said that the Government must ensure that freedom of expression does not translate into hurting religious feelings.

The case pertains to a FB post made from an account of one Sathish Kumar. in which contained two Tamil comments, allegedly including a remark that Krishna Jayanti was a celebration of a man who stole the clothes of bathing women.

A criminal case was registered in the matter on a complaint by one P Paramasivan, who alleged that the post was uploaded with an intent to defame Hindu gods and damage the image of Hindu women.
The complainant alleged that the post could potentially trigger law and order problems and create enmity between different groups on religious grounds.

In February this year, the police filed a negative final report before the trial court as undetected, meaning.

It claimed that it had requested information about the Facebook user who uploaded the post from Meta (which owns Facebook), but was unable to secure such user details.

Meta had sent an email in reply, saying that a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) request or letter rogatory was required for it to share such information.

In March this year, the trial court accepted the police's negative final report, and proceeded to close the case after giving the complainant liberty to file a private complaint.

Aggrieved, the complainant approached the High Court with a criminal revision petition, questioning such a closure of the case.

It noted that the story of Lord Krishna hiding the clothes of gopis is viewed as a symbolic tale with multiple interpretations, including that it was a test to see whether the devotion of the gopis transcended worldly attachments.

However, it further said that in the present case, it is not concerned with interpreting or analysing the story's significance.

“The depiction and comments, however, clearly exceeded acceptable limits. As the petitioner's counsel (advocate S Saravanan) rightly argued, the posts had the potential to offend religious sentiments, leading to social unrest,” it said.

Justice Shankar, however, said that despite the seriousness of the allegations, the respondent police handled the case casually, halting the investigation and closing it as 'undetected'.

He, thus, held that given these circumstances, this court found it necessary to direct the respondent police (represented by government advocate M Aasha) to continue and complete the investigation within a stipulated period.

It also observed that the police had limited its investigation to merely requesting information from Facebook authorities, without undertaking further investigation. It pointed out that the Facebook page in question already contained personal details which could have been verified to trace the Facebook user.

"The investigation was not pursued diligently, and the final report appears to have been filed mechanically,” the court said.