Why Cartoon On Sidhi Urination Incident Showed Man In RSS Dress? MP High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Folk Singer

The Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to quash the FIR registered against Bhojpuri singer Neha Singh Rathore over posting a cartoon on her Twitter and Instagram handles in relation to the incident of a person urinating on a tribal man in Sidhi last year.

The Court noted that the cartoon depicted a person wearing Khaki shorts, the uniform dress of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) workers, although the person involved in the incident was not wearing such a dress.

"Why the dress of persons believing particular ideology was added by the applicant on her own, is a question which is to be decided in the trial," the bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia observed while refusing to quash the FIR registered for the offence under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code.

"The addition of a particular dress was indicative of the fact that applicant wanted to communicate that the offence was committed by a person belonging to a particular ideology. Thus, it was a clear case of making an attempt to disrupt harmony and to provoke the feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will," the Court stated.

“Since the cartoon which was uploaded by the applicant on her Twitter and Instagram account was not in accordance with the incident which had taken place and certain additional things were added by the applicant on her own, this Court is of considered opinion that it cannot be said that the applicant had uploaded the cartoon by exercising her fundamental right of free speech and expression,” the Court said.

Stating that the fundamental right of free speech and expression was subject to reasonable restrictions, the Court said that the satirical posts of the petitioner cannot be regarded as an exercise of the rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

“Although an artist must have the liberty to criticize through satire but adding a particular dress in the cartoon cannot be said to be a satire. The attempt of the applicant was to involve a group of particular ideology without any basis. Therefore, it would not come within the purview of Article 19(1)(a) of Constitution of India and even a satirical expression may be prohibited under Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India,” it said.

 Click here to read the judgment