Supreme Court rejects FIR against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi
A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan allowed the petition filed by Pratapgarhi. Later the bench observed that Pratapgarhi had not committed any offence
Advertisement
Guwahati: The Supreme Court of India on Friday rejected an FIR registered by the Gujarat Police against Congress Rajya Sabha MP Imran Pratapgarhi related to a poem he posted on social media.
The court also stated the importance of free speech and criticized the Gujarat police for trying to criminally charge Pratapgarhi related to a poem.
A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan allowed the petition filed by Pratapgarhi. Later the bench observed that Pratapgarhi had not committed any offence.
The bench also stated that the free expression of thoughts and views by individuals or groups is an integral part of a healthy, civilized society.
The court observed, "It is impossible to lead a dignified life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution without freedom of expression of thoughts and views. In a healthy democracy, one must counter the views of thoughts expressed by an individual or group by expressing another point of view."
The case against Pratapgarhi follows the FIR filed in a Jamnagar police station on January 3, invoking various provisions under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS) relating to promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, and doing acts prejudicial to harmony.
Pratapgarhi posted the poem titled "Ae khoon ke pyase baat suno" (Listen, oh bloodthirsty ones) on the social media platform X, featuring it in the background of a mass marriage video.
Earlier, the Gujarat High Court, on January 17, refused to reject the FIR. The Court pointed to Pratapgarhi’s alleged non-cooperation with the probe and the potential impact of the poem’s references.
Allowing Pratapgarhi’s appeal against the high court order, the Supreme Court, however, took a firm stance against the high court’s reasoning.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court reinforced that “ we should protect and respect a person’s right to express the views, even if a large number of persons dislike the views expressed by another.” Literature, including poetry, dramas, films, satire, and art, makes human life more meaningful.”
“The courts are duty-bound to uphold and enforce the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. Sometimes we, the judges, may not like spoken or written words, but still, it is our duty to uphold the fundamental rights under Article 19(1). We judges are also under an obligation to uphold the Constitution and its respective ideals,” the bench noted.
"The court has a bounden duty to ensure that the Constitution and its ideals are not trampled upon. Constitutional courts must be at the forefront to protect the fundamental rights of individuals, including free speech, which is one of the most cherished fundamental rights for a healthy and vibrant democracy”, it read.
The ruling also delivered a tough message to law enforcement.
“Police officers must abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals. The Constitution itself reveals the philosophy of constitutional ideals," the ruling affirmed.