In a significant development, the 10th Metropolitan Magistrate Court in Egmore, Chennai, has sentenced DMK spokesperson Sivaji Krishnamurthy to three years of imprisonment for making objectionable and allegedly inflammatory remarks during a public meeting.

The verdict was delivered by Magistrate P. Revathi after reviewing evidence and arguments presented by both the prosecution and the defense. Along with the prison term, the court imposed a fine of Rs 20,000 on the accused.

Background of the Case

The case stems from a public meeting organized by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) on June 16, 2023, at Krishnamoorthy Hall in Erukkancheri, Chennai. During his speech, Krishnamurthy allegedly made derogatory and provocative statements targeting Tamil Nadu Governor R. N. Ravi, BJP leader Khushbu Sundar, and other political figures.

Among the remarks cited in the complaint were statements questioning the Governor’s conduct and comments that allegedly included threats. These remarks sparked political controversy and public outrage.

Legal Proceedings and Charges

Following complaints, the Kodungaiyur Police registered a case against Krishnamurthy under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code. These included:

• Section 294(b) (uttering obscene words in public)

• Section 504 (intentional insult to provoke breach of peace)

• Section 505(2) (statements promoting enmity or ill will between groups)

He was arrested in June 2023 and later granted bail. The trial proceeded over the following months, with the prosecution presenting video evidence and witness testimonies from the event.

After evaluating the materials, the court found him guilty under the relevant sections and pronounced the sentence.

Political and Legal Reactions

The ruling has triggered reactions across political circles in Tamil Nadu. Legal experts note that convictions under Section 505(2) are considered serious, especially when speech is interpreted as capable of inciting public disorder.

Krishnamurthy’s legal team has indicated that they plan to file an appeal in a higher court, seeking suspension of the sentence and review of the conviction.

Broader Implications

The case has reignited debate over political speech and its legal boundaries. While freedom of expression remains a constitutional right, courts have consistently held that speech inciting violence or promoting enmity can attract criminal liability.

Observers say the judgment underscores the judiciary’s stance on maintaining public order and civility in political discourse.

As the appeal process unfolds, the case may further shape discussions on accountability and limits within India’s charged political environment.

Long or Short, get news the way you like. No ads. No redirections. Download Newspin and Stay Alert, The CSR Journal Mobile app, for fast, crisp, clean updates!

App Store –  https://apps.apple.com/in/app/newspin/id6746449540 

Google Play Store – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.inventifweb.newspin&pcampaignid=web_share