“ಕನ್ನಡ / ಕನ್ನಡಿಗರಿಗೆ ಬೈದು ಬರಿ sorry ಕೇಳ್ತೀನಿ ಅಂದರೆ ಬಿಡ್ತೀವಾ !! ನಾವು ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ ಕನ್ನಡಿಗರು”
— ಸಂದೀಪ್ ಪಾರ್ಶ್ವನಾಥ್ , ಅಧ್ಯಷರು ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯ ಕನ್ನಡಿಗ
ಕನ್ನಡ ಕನ್ನಡಿಗರು ಕರ್ನಾಟಕವನ್ನು ನಿಂದನೆ ಮಾಡುವವರಿಗೆ ಒಂದು ಪಾಠ
ಪ್ರೀತಿಶ್ ಕುಮಾರ್ ಪಾಟೀಲ್ MNC ನಲ್ಲಿ ಕೆಲಸ , ಇವನ ವಿರುದ್ಧ ನಮ್ಮ ತಂಡದ ಸಂದೀಪ್ ಪಾರ್ಶ್ವನಾಥ ರವರು 505 IPC ಸೆಕ್ಷನ್ ನ ಅಡಿ ದೂರು ದಾಖಲಿಸಿದ್ದರು .
ಈತ High Court ಮೊರೆ ಹೋಗಿದ್ದ , high ಕೋರ್ಟ್ ಇತನಿಗೆ ಛೀಮಾರಿ ಹಾಕಿದೆ
Accenture Employee from Maharashtra had apologised for post; Trust took him to court
What is the limit to an individual’s freedom of expression? Can a rant on social media land you in jail? This is a case in point.
The Karnataka High Court has refused the plea of a Maharashtrian in Bengaluru to quash a case against him for his derogatory remarks on south Indians. The HC said he has to face the trial in the case and it was for the lower court to decide whether his comments, made on a Facebook post, constituted an offence.
The comments he made earlier this year, had led to a severe backlash forcing him to retract his statements and apologise. However, a police complaint against him has resulted in the case.
Pritish Kumar Patil, 22, lives in Gangammanagudi. He is facing charges under Section 505 of the IPC for “statements conducting to public mischief”. It is based on a complaint filed by Sandeep Parswanath, president of the Samanya Kannadiga, a Kannada organisation. The case is pending before the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Patil approached the Karnataka high court to get the case quashed.
Refusing to quash the proceedings in the lower court, the HC in its order on December 6, said: “The content of the post which the petitioner (Patil) is said to have placed on his Facebook account, is the subject matter of the complaint by a Trust which is supposedly working for the betterment of the Kannada language. Therefore, the offence alleged could be made out with reference to the statement in the post and is to be tested at the trial. There is no warrant for quashing the proceedings.”
Patil, from Maharashtra, is an employee @ Accenture in Bengaluru. A post by a non-Kannadiga against a BMTC bus conductor for conversing only in Kannada created a great deal of controversy. Following suggestions by local people, the post was altered to remove the offensive lines.
At this point, Patil joined the debate and one of his comments about ‘south Indians’ not learning Hindi and English but asking outsiders to learn their language instead, got everyone angry.
Patil got trolled and his personal information and address was widely shared online. He issued an apology letter, retracting his words.
That wasn’t enough for Parswanath and he filed a complaint with the police.
In the past, courts have come down heavily on government action against social media posts, to uphold freedom of expression. The outcome of this particular case will be watched closely.