'Democratic Right Of Citizens To Protest & Persuade': Bombay HC Quashes FIR Against Green Activist Who Sent Messages To Metro Director To Save Aarey Forest

In a significant judgement on the use of technology to protest, the Bombay High Court has rapped the Mumbai police for booking a green activist alleging harassment over messages sent to IAS officer Ashwini Bhide in 2018 against felling of trees at Aarey Colony for the Metro III car shed.

A division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and MM Sathaye quashed the FIR registered at the Bandra-Kurla Complex police station against Avijit Michael, a resident of Bangalore and observed that there was nothing “offensive” in the messages and the accused was only trying to assert his democratic rights.

"His intention appears to be to protect the forest, he considers to be acting like a pair of lungs for the city of Mumbai. These messages do not contain any offensive material or any obscenities. Rather, they appear to have been sent in assertion of a democratic right of citizen of this country to put forth his view point, to object, to protest, to persuade, to urge, and so on."

The court further observed that registering a case against a virtual protester would invade upon the rights of citizens no matter how high the complainant’s position.

" It then follows that if anybody is booked for criminal offences such as those as have been registered against the present petitioner, it may amount to an invasion upon the rights of the citizens of this country. Such an effort by any complainant, howsoever high he or she may be in position, cannot be countenanced and must be stopped.”

It further cautioned the police against registering an FIR in such a case.

Upon such a complaint, as the one involved here, police must never book any ordinary citizen of the country under criminal law and if it does, it would be like suppressing his voice against what he considers to be a wrongful thing."

In 2018, several green activists and environmentalist had come together to save the felling of thousands of trees at Aarey Colony, famously called Mumbai’s last green lung. The Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Ltd (MMRCL) had planned the metro line 3 car shed in Aarey for which over 2,000 trees were eventually felled that year.

Around this time, Sanjay Dani, IT head of MMRCL filed a complaint with the BKC police alleging that Ashwini Bhide - MMRCL’s MD back then, was being harassed after her mobile number was made public and she was inundated with massages.

Subsequently, Michael was booked under sections 186 (obstructing public servant from discharging duty) of the IPC, Sections 43(f) (denying authorised person access to computer) and 66 (computer related offences) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Michael approached the HC seeking to quash the FIR. He was represented by Senior Advocate Gayatri Singh and advocate Vijay Hiremath.

The court observed that even if all the allegations were taken at face value, they wouldn’t constitute an offence. The order explains that to constitute an offence under section 186 of the IPC it is necessary for the public servant who has been obstructed, to voluntarily come forward and allege the obstruction.

However, neither did Bhide complain herself nor was there any evidence of any communication from her to the person who eventually filed the complaint.

“[The messages] do not by themselves show that the sender of those messages had at any point of time intended to obstruct Smt. Ashwini Bhide or had any knowledge that by those messages, he would create the effect of obstructing Smt. Ashwini Bhide from discharging her public functions.”

Moreover, the messages merely stated that Aarey forest was a green lung for the city of Mumbai and he pleaded with Bhide to look for alternatives so that 3,500 trees can be saved, the judge observed.

“These messages show at their face-value that the sender of the messages was the person who had intention to make efforts for preservation of the trees in the larger interest of society," the court added.

The bench held the petitioner had acted in a bonafide manner “on the basis of what he believed to be an act which was necessary for maintaining the health of the city of Mumbai.”

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 184