Madras High Court Sets Aside Summons to Seeman in IPS Officer's Defamation Case: Procedural Victory Under BNSS

For Seeman, this represents an immediate procedural victory.

Chennai:

The Madras High Court's Madurai Bench has invalidated the summons issued against Naam Tamilar Katchi Chief Coordinator and actor Seeman in a defamation case initiated by senior IPS officer Varun Kumar. The court ruled that the Tiruchirappalli Magistrate violated mandatory procedures outlined in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Justice L Victoria Gowri determined that the Magistrate had improperly issued summons without providing Seeman the required pre-cognisance hearing. The judge noted that the court had "inverted the statutory design, putting the cart before the horse."

The High Court did not dismiss the underlying complaint. Rather, it permitted the Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG) to file the case anew after following the complete statutory protocol under the BNSS, including granting the accused a meaningful opportunity to present his response.

This ruling provides Seeman with immediate procedural relief as it nullifies the previously issued summons. The court observed that the matter raises "foundational questions... the limits of criminal law to police political speech," a statement viewed as reinforcing Seeman's defense that his remarks were political in nature.

For DIG Varun Kumar, while the ruling represents a setback, it does not permanently close his case. The court has preserved his option to reinstate the complaint if filed according to proper procedure. The judgment also emphasized the necessity for thorough scrutiny when active police officers initiate criminal proceedings against opposition political figures.

The controversy originated from Seeman's statements on July 11, 2024, following the arrest of NTK functionary "Sattai" Durai Murugan, when he allegedly characterized the officer as "casteist by birth," comments the IPS officer claimed damaged his personal reputation.

The Magistrate had recorded evidence and issued summons, compelling Seeman to challenge the process as unlawful under the newly implemented criminal procedure law.