Cartoonists Are Part Of Media & Entitled To Freedom Of Expression: Kerala HC Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Malayalam Manorama Publishers & Editors
The Kerala High Court quashed criminal proceedings against publisher and editors of Malayalam daily, Malayam Manorama that published a cartoon of National Flag and Mahatma Gandhi while celebrating 70th Independence Day.
The Court held thus while observing that the cartoonists are also part and parcel of the media and are entitled to freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.
The bench of Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan observed, “…the Cartoonists are also part and parcel of the press and media, and the cartoonists are also entitled to the freedom of expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The fundamental right allows them to express their opinions, ideas, and creativity through cartoons, caricatures, and other forms of visual art.”
Advocate Millu Dandapani appeared for the Appellant and Advocate S.R.K. Prathap appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
The General Secretary of the Bharatiya Janata Party filed a complaint with the Sub Inspector of Police alleging that a cartoon published in Malayalam Manorama, a Malayalam daily dishonoured the National Flag and the image of the father of the Nation by depicting them as the number '70' with a black line outlining the saffron portion of the flag. The complainant claimed this was a deliberate act of disrespect, violating the Flag Code of India, 1971. Based on this complaint a criminal case was registered and subsequently, a final report under Section 2 of the Act was filed.
The Court observed, “One of the key elements of the art of caricature is exaggeration, which means emphasizing prominent features or traits. Another element is distortion, which means manipulating proportions, shapes, and sizes. Another element of the art of caricature is simplification which means reducing complex features to simple forms. Nevertheless, it focuses on essential characteristics using visual metaphors or allusions.”
The Court said that unless there is a deliberate action to insult the national honour, the provisions of the Act 1971 are not attracted.
The Court said that whether an act attracts the offence under Section 2 of the Act 1971 is to be decided based on the factual situation of that case and the intention behind the person making the alleged insults.
The Court said that the caricature created by the cartoonist did not insult the national honour or the father of the Nation and the prosecution against the Petitioners was completely unnecessary.
Finally, the Court quashed the proceedings and allowed the Criminal Miscellaneous Case.
Cause Title: Mammen Verghese v. State of Kerala
