The High Court of Bombay has quashed a FIR registered against a Twitter user, Sunaina Holey by the Mumbai Police cyber cell for her tweet allegedly promoting enmity between 2 communities.

The Court said that the tweet did not name any communities, & it has to be judged from the perspective of a prudent man.

The Bench of Justice SS Shinde & Justice MS Karnik said, “Assuming that the said tweet is an extreme view expressed in retaliation to the view expressed by one of the members of the crowd who was blaming the Prime Minister of India for the outbreak of the pandemic, the said Tweet has still to be judged from the standpoint of what the reaction of a strong-minded, reasonable or a prudent person would be. It is material to note that reading of the contents of the Tweet would reveal that neither any community nor any religion is named. Nothing substantial has been brought on record by the prosecution to hold that because of the said tweet, hatred or enmity was created in between two communities. If the test of a strong or a prudent person judging the contents of the said Tweet is applied, by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the tweet created hatred or enmity between the two groups of communities. Upon reading the contents of the said tweet, it is difficult to arrive at the conclusion that the Petitioner has mens rea (intention of wrongdoing) to commit an alleged offence under section 153A of the IPC.”

“Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc & doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony," states Section 153 A.

The Court said that while it appreciates the efforts of Police in ensuring that the situation doesn't go out of hand, the contents of the FIR do not constitute an offence. “After careful & in-depth consideration, we deem it fit to quash FIR,” the Court, therefore, ordered.

Holey had approached the court with a plea to quash the FIR registered against her after she tweeted a video. The court noted that she had not made the video. It was only posted with a comment.

Holey's counsel Abhinav Chadrachud had argued that the fundamental right to speech of a citizen could not be curtailed & that Holey was merely expressing her opinion & criticising the policy of the government. Extending this argument, the Bench expressed hope that individuals occupying important positions of power must learn to tolerate criticism. 

Source Link

Picture Source :