Madhya Pradesh High Court Refuses To Quash Hate Speech FIR Over Instagram Post 'Insulting Religious Beliefs'
Dismissing a man's plea for quashing a FIR registered under Section 153A IPC against him for uploading allegedly offensive material on his Instagram account, the Madhya Pradesh High Court said that that the man's "defence" that the post was uploaded by hacking his account cannot be considered "at this stage". For context, Section 153A of IPC pertains to promoting enmity between different...
Dismissing a man's plea for quashing a FIR registered under Section 153A IPC against him for uploading allegedly offensive material on his Instagram account, the Madhya Pradesh High Court said that that the man's "defence" that the post was uploaded by hacking his account cannot be considered "at this stage".
For context, Section 153A of IPC pertains to promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony
A single judge bench of Justice G.S. Ahluwalia in its order said, “The petitioner has admitted that an offensive post was uploaded on his Instagram account. Now, the only question for consideration is as to whether it was a deliberate act on the part of the petitioner or somebody else uploaded the said post by hacking his Instagram account? It is a defence of the petitioner, which cannot be considered at this stage".
Perusing through the FIR the court said that the same made it clear that the complainant had inquired from the petitioner, why the "offensive post" had been uploaded on his Instagram account.
Instead of explaining that the said post was uploaded by somebody else by hacking his account, the petitioner started "abusing and humiliating the complainant and also hurt his religious feelings", the order notes adding that this conduct of the petitioner indicates that his defence was incorrect.
"This conduct of the petitioner indicates that the defence of uploading the offensive post on his Instagram account by somebody else is incorrect. Be that whatever it may be. Since, uploading of an offensive post on his Instagram account has been admitted by the petitioner himself, therefore, he had no right to react in a manner in which it was done with the complainant. Whether allegations made in the FIR are correct or not cannot be considered at this stage," the court said.
The high court further observed that while exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or under Article 226 of Constitution of India it has to consider the "allegations as a gospel truth" and then come to a conclusion on whether any offence is made out or not.
"The defence of the suspect/accused cannot be taken into account. Considering the fact that the FIR in question discloses the commission of cognizable offence, no case is made out warranting interference," the high court said dismissing the plea.
The petitioner's counsel submitted that on August 15, 2023, "some persons" by hacking the petitioner's Instagram account uploaded an offensive post "thereby hurting the feelings of another religion". He argued that on the same day the petitioner gave a written complaint to the concerned police station, stating that some unknown person has uploaded an offensive post on his Instagram account. On August 17, 2023 the petitioner's father also made a complaint regarding the uploading of the offensive post.
However, on the same day an FIR was been registered for offence under IPC Sections 294(Obscene acts and songs), 153-A, 295(A) (Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) and under provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The counsel said that the allegations made in the FIR are false and the petitioner's father had already expressed his apprehension on August 17 by making a complaint.
Case title: Mohammad Bilal Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others
Case No: WRIT PETITION No. 27241 of 2024