Kannada actor Chetan Kumar, who was arrested for his tweet that he had posted about one of the judges hearing the hijab issue, was granted bail on Friday, February 25. While granting him bail, a magistrate court has directed him to furnish a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh and two sureties of Rs 1 lakh each.
The bail order states, “The accused shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused. He shall not make, publish, post, or circulate any derogatory/provocative statements in any manner so as to disturb communal harmony and public peace.” His bail order also states that Chetan must cooperate in the investigation and attend all dates of hearing.
Chetan was taken in for questioning by the Sheshadripuram police from his home on Tuesday, February 23. His wife Megha had raised the issue of his disappearance, as even she was not informed of his whereabouts. Later, the police issued a statement saying that the actor had been arrested over a tweet that he posted on February 16. The police booked him under a suo motu case.
In it, he questioned Karnataka High Court judge Krishna Dixit, who is among the three judges hearing the hijab case. Chetan had mentioned in his tweet how the High Court Justice had earlier granted bail to a rape accused, noting the fact that the woman falling asleep after the sexual assault was “unbecoming of an Indian woman; that is not the way our women react when they are ravished.”
Chetan was booked under Section 505 (2) (Intent to incite a class or community to commit offence against another class or community) and Section 504 (Intentionally insulting, thereby giving provocation to any person to break public peace) of the Indian Penal Code. Arguing before the Magistrate judge, the prosecutor for the state had argued against bail for the actor, claiming that he would create communal hatred if released.
However, Chetan’s advocate S Balan told TNM that there were discrepancies in the arrest procedure. He criticised the police for not preparing an arrest memo, not taking Chetan’s wife’s signature at the time of arrest, and also for keeping him at an undisclosed location, all of which are violations under the guidelines for arrest issued by the Supreme Court in the DK Basu vs State of West Bengal case.