'Expressing Dissent Hallmark Of Democracy': Allahabad High Court Quashes FIR For Tweets Against UP CM
The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday held that merely expressing dissent against the affairs of the State is not a criminal offence. A division bench of Justice Pankaj Naqvi and Justice Vivek Agarwal in its judgement, stated, "Expressing dissent on law and order situation in the State, is a hallmark of a constitutional liberal democracy like ours, constitutionally protected under...
The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday held that merely expressing dissent against the affairs of the State is not a criminal offence.
A division bench of Justice Pankaj Naqvi and Justice Vivek Agarwal in its judgement, stated, "Expressing dissent on law and order situation in the State, is a hallmark of a constitutional liberal democracy like ours, constitutionally protected under Article 19 of the Constitution."
The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by one Yashwant Singh. The petitioner had sought directions from the Court to quash an FIR that was lodged against him by the UP Police for his tweets which made critical remakes about the UP government.
The Petitioner had tweeted that the Chief Minister of UP, Yogi Adityanath, has turned UP into a 'jungleraj', where law and order have no prevalence. The Petitioner also cited various incidents of abduction, demand of ransom and murders that rampantly taken place in the state.
The Counsel for the petitioner, Advocate Dharmendra Singh, submitted that the right to dissent is a fundamental right which has been enshrined under Article 19 of the Constitution (Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression). He further argued, "Mere dissent does not amount to criminality, FIR has been lodged malafidely only with a view to coerce the petitioner to stop expressing his dissent against the State government, no offence is made out, FIR be quashed."
The offences alleged against the petitioner were under Section 66-D of the Information and Technology Act (punishment for cheating by personation by using computer resource) and Section 500 (punishment for defamation) of the IPC. The Court examined both of these sections.
With regards to section 66-D IT Act, the Court stated, "We after analysing the above provisions, qua allegation made in the FIR do not find even remotely a commission of offence under Section 66-D, as said provision relates to cheating by personation. It is not the case of prosecution that while committing the overt act, the petitioner either tweeted using other's twitter handle or was there any allegation of cheating. No offence under Section 66-D I.T. Act is made out."
The Court further asserted, "In so far, Section 500 IPC is concerned, same is also not made out, as the alleged tweet cannot be said to fall within the mischief of defamation."
The Court expressed that right to dissent is a constitutionally protected right under Article 19 of the Constitution and an expression of dissent about the State and its law and order situation doesn't amount to any crime.
"In view of above, the writ petition is allowed. The FIR dated 2.8.2020, registered as Case Crime No. 371 of 2020 under section 500 I.P.C and 66-D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, P.S. Bhognipur, District Rama Bai Nagar and consequential proceedings are quashed," concluded the Court.
Case Title: Yashwant Singh v. State of UP & Ors.
Read Order