'Pakistan Zindabad' post not a threat to India’s sovereignty: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that posting a message expressing support for another country does not constitute an offence under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), Live Law reported.

Section 152 of the BNS pertains to acts that endanger the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. The court observed that the provision is a newly introduced one with no direct equivalent in the former Indian Penal Code (IPC), and therefore, should be invoked with due caution, according to Live Law.

Critics, however, have described Section 152 as a “repackaged version” of the colonial-era sedition law. The Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, replaced the British-era Indian Penal Code, 1860, on July 1, 2024.

The court made the observation while granting bail to Meerut resident Sajid Chaudhary, who was accused of forwarding a Facebook post reading “Pakistan Zindabad.” Chaudhary had been in jail since May 13.

In an order dated September 25, Justice Santosh Rai stated that while a post that provokes anger or disharmony among citizens could fall under Section 196 of the BNS — which deals with promoting enmity — it would “definitively not attract the ingredients of Section 152.”

Justice Rai further noted that spoken words or social media posts are protected under the right to freedom of speech and expression, which should not be narrowly construed unless they pose a threat to the sovereignty and integrity of the nation or encourage separatism.

Also Read:Pakistan government and protesters sign agreement to end PoK unrest

Clarifying the scope of Section 152, the bench explained that the provision applies only when a person, through spoken or written words, signs, visible representations, or electronic communication, promotes secession, armed rebellion, subversive activities, or endangers the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.

During the hearing, the court also observed that the prosecution had failed to produce any evidence showing that the accused had made any statement against India’s sovereignty or integrity.