SC Refuses to Quash FIR against Bengaluru Man for Online Post against PM
The bench ordered, "The petitioner has brazenly abused the fundamental right of free speech and expression. We cannot extend any discretion or relief at this stage"
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to quash an FIR registered against a Bengaluru resident for making a social media post against Prime Minister Narendra Modi, observing that the petitioner had abused the right to free speech.
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi dismissed the plea filed by Gurudath Shetty, 24, challenging the FIR lodged over a critical post targeting the Prime Minister.
Rejecting the plea, the apex court said, “The petitioner has brazenly abused the fundamental right of free speech and expression. We cannot extend any discretion or relief at this stage.”
However, the court said the petitioner was free to approach the appropriate jurisdictional High Court to seek remedies in accordance with law.
When Shetty’s counsel sought seven days’ protection from coercive action, the Chief Justice declined, stating, “There is no question of protection.”
Shetty has been booked for cognisable and bailable offences under Sections 336(4) and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
The petitioner’s counsel argued that Shetty was not the author of the post and had merely reposted it with a question mark. The Chief Justice responded by asking whether the petitioner wanted the contents of the post to be read out in open court.
“You have not shown any remorse. You have no sense of repentance or tendered any apology for your actions towards the people you have abused,” the Chief Justice said.
According to the FIR, the complainant alleged that the post was intended to tarnish the reputation of the Prime Minister.
In his plea, Shetty claimed that Gujarat Police personnel reached his residence in Bengaluru on November 10 without a warrant and forcibly took him in a car. He said he was released around midnight and served a notice under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) to appear before the investigating officer.
He sought quashing of the FIR, terming it illegal, arbitrary and violative of constitutional and statutory safeguards under the Constitution and the BNSS, 2023.