Karnataka High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Man Chargesheeted For FB Post With ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ Message

Justice V Srishananda allowed the petition filed by one K M Basha and quashed the order taking cognisance of the chargesheet filed against him under Section 505 IPC. The court said before taking of the cognizance by the Magistrate for the offences punishable under Section 505 of IPC, prior sanction under Section 196(1)(A) of Cr.P.C. is necessary.

"It is also clear from the ... provisions that before such a sanction could be granted, preliminary investigation is to be conducted in respect of the offence punishable under Section 505 of IPC by the competent authority by a person as is contemplated under Section 196(3) of Cr.P.C.," said the court. 

In October 2020, the petitioner had allegedly posted a message wherein purportedly a soldier of Pakistan was conversing with a lady with the words “Har dil ki awaaz Pakistan zindabad”. He further shared the message with his friends on Facebook.

On receipt of the information, the Police Sub-Inspector went to the Tehsildar Office and enquired with the person standing there. He revealed his name as K.M.Basha, and on enquiry, he admitted that he had shared the message. Further, he showed the message in his mobile and later, he deleted the same.

A complaint was lodged by the police sub inspector claiming that sharing such a message would amount to insulting the soldiers of the country, resulting in demoralising them and also disturbing peace and tranquillity of the society. Subsequently, the police investigated the matter and a chargesheet was filed.

The magistrate took cognizance of the matter. Following which, the petitioner approached the high court seeking quashing of the proceedings.

The counsel representing the petitioner argued that the registration of case against him is an abuse of process of law. The court was also told no sanction from the government was obtained to prosecute the petitioner and therefore the magistrate could not have taken cognisance of the matter. 

The plea was opposed by the prosecution saying that order taking cognizance by the Magistrate is just and proper.

The bench said for the offences punishable under Section 505 of IPC, prior sanction is necessary.

"Further the report of the Police Sub-Inspector has not been properly registered while being investigated. Necessary compliance as to the provisions of Section 196(1) of Cr.P.C, is not followed," it added.

While quashing the proceedings, the court clarified that it would not prevent the investigating agency to comply with the provisions of Section 196 of Cr.P.C., and investigate the matter afresh in accordance with law.

"If sufficient materials are found in such investigation, the investigating agency is at liberty to file necessary chargesheet and proceed with the case in accordance with law," it added.

Case Title: K M Basha And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201668/2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 29

Appearance: Advocate Arunkumar Amargundappa for petitioner.

HCGP Maya T.R for respondent.