The Kerala High Court recently quashed a case filed against Goa Governor, P. S. Sreedharan Pillai, regarding his speech criticizing the Sabarimala judgment. The case was dismissed, with the court ruling that the speech did not warrant legal action.
Background:
The case was filed following a speech made by the Goa Governor in which he expressed strong views against the 2018 Sabarimala judgment, which allowed women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple. The Governor’s comments were perceived by some as controversial and sparked legal proceedings, with allegations of promoting discord and disrespecting the judiciary.
Court’s Rationale:
The Kerala High Court concluded that the speech did not constitute any offense that required legal intervention. The court held that the Governor’s comments fell within the realm of free speech and expression, which is protected under the Constitution. It also highlighted the importance of allowing public figures to express their opinions on judicial rulings, so long as it does not incite violence or hatred.
Existing Measures:
Under the law, speech that promotes hatred or violence can lead to legal action, but the court found that the Governor’s remarks did not meet this threshold. The ruling reinforced the importance of maintaining the balance between free speech and the responsibilities that come with public office.
Conclusion:
The Kerala High Court’s decision to quash the case against the Goa Governor underscores the protection of free speech, even when it involves criticism of judicial decisions. It serves as a reminder of the constitutional rights afforded to individuals in expressing their views, while also upholding the boundaries of responsible speech.