sekarreporter1: https://twitter.com/sekarreporter1/status/1605050034508091392?t=aMwS5Xi0zAGFxmunomyNPQ&s=08 [12/20, 09:28] sekarreporter1: *GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT* *Ver Se Innovation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police & Anr.* Crl.O.P. No. 17074 of 2019 Dated: 15.11.2022 *HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN* allowed the Criminal Original Petition in the matter relating to *“Inflammatory Statements – FIR – Ss. 153B & 505(1)(c), IPC”*, quashed the FIR and further observed and held as follows:

[12/20, 09:28] sekarreporter1: https://twitter.com/sekarreporter1/status/1605050034508091392?t=aMwS5Xi0zAGFxmunomyNPQ&s=08
[12/20, 09:28] sekarreporter1: *GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT*

*Ver Se Innovation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police & Anr.*
Crl.O.P. No. 17074 of 2019
Dated: 15.11.2022

*HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN* allowed the Criminal Original Petition in the matter relating to *“Inflammatory Statements – FIR – Ss. 153B & 505(1)(c), IPC”*, quashed the FIR and further observed and held as follows:

1) The criminal complaint was made by a so-called party worker, alleging that the photograph published by the petitioner carrying caption of the former CM seen with an accused arrested in a fake currency case, caused shock to party cadre, therefore, FIR was filed under Sections. 153B(1)(b) and 505(1)(c).

2) This Court finds a clear abuse of power. There was no denial of the persons in the photograph, nor about the caption. When the content of the caption and the genuineness of the photo has not been denied, a stranger has no locus to initiate a complaint, when no class or group of persons had been affected by the photo.

3) If there is any objectionable content in the news report, the persons who are likely to be affected are only the persons found in the photo and that cannot be over turned to attract Section 153B or 505(1)(c) of IPC.

4) Hence, the FIR is quashed.