Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against two individuals accused of sharing “anti-national” and derogatory posts against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh on Facebook, observing that social media cannot be misused to disturb public harmony.
A single-judge Bench of Justice Saurabh Srivastava, hearing a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) filed by Jubair Ansari and another accused, dismissed the plea seeking quashing of the FIR, charge sheet, and a cognisance order issued by a Sonbhadra court in November last year in connection with a case registered at Anpara Police Station.
The Court observed that while social media offers a platform for free expression, it is often misused when individuals post content without understanding its consequences. “Sometimes social media is misused where people post such comments which hurt the feelings of others and trigger disharmony on a large scale,” the Court noted.
According to the FIR, the accused had allegedly circulated objectionable and “anti-national” posts from the Facebook account of a Pakistani YouTuber. The prosecution said the posts were directed against the Prime Minister and the RSS, leading to charges under Sections 353(2), 196(1)(a), 3(5), 352 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
The petitioners argued that the FIR was filed with mala fide intent, claiming that no specific date or time of the alleged incident was mentioned and that the allegations were vague, relying only on Facebook posts. They further contended that the magistrate had mechanically taken cognisance without proper application of mind.
Opposing the plea, the prosecution argued that the matter involved disputed questions of fact which required trial and evidence examination, and therefore could not be considered in a quashing petition.
In its order, the High Court emphasised that freedom of speech on social media comes with responsibility and cannot extend to content that promotes enmity or hatred. Interpreting Section 196(1)(a) of the BNS, which replaces Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code, the Court said the provision applies when there is a deliberate intent to create disharmony or provoke hostility between communities based on religion, caste, language, race, or community.
The judge noted that the allegations were prima facie supported by evidence collected during the investigation. It further held that at the stage of summoning, a magistrate is only required to assess whether sufficient grounds exist to proceed, not whether the evidence is sufficient for conviction.
“From perusal of the material on record, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants,” the Court stated, adding that no grounds for interference under its inherent jurisdiction were made out. The plea was accordingly dismissed as “devoid of merit”.
With IANS inputs