New Delhi, March 3 – The Supreme Court of India on Monday stressed the importance of police understanding and respecting the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, 75 years after the adoption of the Constitution. The remarks came as the apex court reserved its judgment on a plea by Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi to quash an FIR filed against him for allegedly sharing a provocative song during a public event.
A bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan highlighted the need for sensitivity when dealing with cases related to freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Justice Oka remarked, "When it comes to the freedom of speech and expression, it has to be preserved."
He further pointed out that police officers should exercise caution before registering an FIR, stating, “They must at least read and understand (the article of the Constitution). Seventy-five years after the Constitution, the freedom of speech and expression has to be at least now understood by the police.”
The bench emphasized that the content in question was “ultimately a poem” that conveyed a message of non-violence and was not directed against any religion. Justice Oka explained, "There seems to be some issue with its translation... This poem indirectly says even if somebody indulges in violence, we will not indulge in violence. That is the message which the poem gives. It is not against any particular community."
The controversy began when an FIR was filed against Pratapgarhi on January 3, following a mass marriage function in Jamnagar, Gujarat, where he allegedly shared a video of the song. The Gujarat police, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, defended the FIR, claiming the song was “sadak chhap” (pedestrian) and could not be linked to prominent poet Faiz Ahmad Faiz. Mehta further argued that the video message, rather than the poem itself, sparked the controversy.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Pratapgarhi, countered, arguing that it was the MP's team, not Pratapgarhi personally, who uploaded the video. Despite this, Mehta contended that Pratapgarhi would still be held accountable for the content shared on his social media platform.
The Supreme Court bench, after hearing arguments, decided to reserve its judgment. Earlier, on January 21, the Court had stayed the proceedings against Pratapgarhi, issuing notice to the Gujarat government and complainant Kishanbhai Deepakbhai Nanda in response to the Congress leader's appeal. Pratapgarhi had challenged the January 17 ruling of the Gujarat High Court, which dismissed his petition to quash the FIR, stating the investigation was still in its early stages.
Pratapgarhi, who serves as the national chairman of the Congress Minority Cell, was booked under Sections 196 and 197 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly promoting enmity between different groups and making prejudicial assertions against national integration.
The controversial 46-second video clip, shared by Pratapgarhi on X (formerly Twitter), showed him walking through a crowd, with flower petals being showered on him, while a song played in the background. The FIR claimed the lyrics of the song were provocative, potentially harming national unity and religious sentiments.
In his plea to quash the FIR, Pratapgarhi argued that the poem delivered a message of love and non-violence, and that the FIR was lodged with "malicious intent" to harass him, given his political affiliation with the Congress party.
Public prosecutor Hardik Dave opposed Pratapgarhi's plea, asserting that the poem's lyrics indicated a call to incite rage against the state. He pointed out that Pratapgarhi had failed to appear for the initial notice issued in January, and another notice had to be sent.
The Gujarat High Court, in its January 17 order, had referred to the prosecution's material, noting that the post shared on social media had stirred significant social unrest and disturbed communal harmony.
The case remains under the Supreme Court's consideration, with judgment awaited.
Last updated by a enewsx:
