No terms of respect: HC jolt to Kerala minister in anti-Constitution remarks

The Kerala high court has ordered further probe into the allegation that state fisheries minister Saji Cherian 'insulted' the Constitution in a speech at an event in July 2022 by saying that certain words used by him “cannot be terms of respect generally”.

The high court’s direction was used by the Congress-led United Democratic Front Opposition and the Bharatiya Janata Party to demand Cherian’s resignation or sacking from his ministerial post, while he said that further steps would be decided after going through the order.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas said that it was a matter of common perception in the Malayalam language that the words — kuntham and kudachakram — “when spoken in collocation with each other, cannot be stated to be used in a respectful manner”.

Cherian in his speech had used these words and also said that "Constitution is ideal for looting the people," the high court noted in its order.

“Thus, the words used by the minister in his speech, like ‘ideal Constitution to loot the people’ or the words secularism, democracy, kuntham (spear), kudachakram (a type of firecracker) cannot be terms of respect generally.

“But the question that begs the answer is whether the context in which those terms were used shows disrespect to the Constitution. The statement that the Indian Constitution is ideal for looting the people does not leave much room for discussion. There cannot even be two views on that statement,” the high court said.

It further noted that the expression — secularism, democracy, kuntham, kudachakram — was obviously referring to the Preamble which is a part of the Constitution.

“The said expression cannot be stated to be used with respect... ,” the high court observed.

The high court noted that the investigating officer in his final report said there was no intention behind the words to disrespect the Constitution.

“It is difficult to comprehend the said conclusion and the manner in which such a conclusion was arrived at.

“When the statutory intention is explicit that no member of the public shall disrespect the Constitution, and when the words themselves can manifest the intention, the conclusion of the investigating officer (IO) is not legally tenable,” the high court said.

It said the report of the forensic laboratory and the video and audio recording of the speech were relevant to conclude whether the words were used disrespectfully or not.

The high court said it was not proper for the IO to conclude no offence was made out even before receiving the forensic lab’s report.

It said that even the magisterial court erred in accepting the final report without noticing that there were several witnesses, like mediapersons, who had viewed or published the speech.

“Those persons were not questioned nor were their statements taken. Further, the investigating officer came to the conclusion solely on the basis of the statements given by persons who attended the meeting conducted by a political party.

“The statements of those witnesses who attended the meeting are likely to have been prejudiced due to their affiliation to the political party. Hence, relying only on those statements would not amount to a fair investigation,” the high court said.

It said the conclusion arrived at by the IO was in haste, the investigation conducted was not proper and the magisterial court was wrong in accepting the final report.

“On a consideration of the entire circumstances, this court is of the view that the final report ought to be set aside and a further investigation be conducted,” the high court said while allowing a plea by a lawyer challenging the decision of the magisterial court and the final report of the police.

The high court further said that since the accused is a minister, an investigation by an SHO would not suffice and a superior agency was required.

“The further investigation hence ought to be conducted by the state crime branch. The state police chief shall immediately pass appropriate orders handing over further investigation to the state crime branch with an officer of integrity to lead the investigation. Needless to mention, the investigation shall be completed without undue delay,” it said.

Cherian’s speech had created a political storm in the state with the opposition demanding that he resign or be sacked, which finally resulted in his resignation from his Cabinet posts on July 6, 2022.

He was later reinstated in the Cabinet.