Critical Tweets are Free Speech: Telangana High Court

Hyderabad: Justice N. Tukaramji of the Telangana High Court observed that courts are duty-bound to adopt a balanced approach that safeguards the constitutional guarantee of free speech under Article 19(1)(a) while ensuring that such freedom does not extend to speech causing tangible harm, such as misinformation, harassment or incitement to disorder. Preserving this balance, he said, is essential for both democratic discourse and the maintenance of public order.

The court ruled that social media posts that are politically critical fall within the protected scope of free expression under Article 19(1)(a). It held that a series of tweets shared from the handle @Nallabalu by Nalla Balu alias Durham Shashidhar, which criticised the Congress and the Chief Minister, did not meet the legal threshold for offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) or the Information Technology Act, 2008.

Accordingly, Justice Tukaramji quashed multiple FIRs registered against Shashidhar. These FIRs had invoked Sections 192 (provocation to cause riot), 352 (insult to provoke breach of peace), 353(1)(b) (statements conducing to public harm), 356 (criminal defamation), read with 61(2) (criminal conspiracy) of the BNS, as well as Section 67 (publication of obscene material) of the IT Act, 2008.

The court found no prima facie material suggesting incitement to violence, obscenity or threat to public order. At best, it observed, the content could relate to defamation — a non-cognisable offence — which requires a complaint from the aggrieved party and prior magistrate approval, both of which were absent.

Calling the proceedings legally unsustainable, Justice Tukaramji emphasised that FIRs arising from political speech must not be registered mechanically. To prevent misuse of the criminal justice process, the court issued a set of operational guidelines for police and judicial officers handling speech-related complaints.

The directives require police to verify the locus standi of complainants, conduct preliminary inquiry before registering cognisable offences, apply a high threshold in cases concerning speech, and seek legal opinion in sensitive matters. Action in political speech cases must be avoided unless there is clear incitement to violence or a demonstrable threat to public order.

The court further directed that frivolous or politically motivated complaints be closed under Section 176(1) of the BNS, and that arrests comply strictly with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014), which laid down safeguards to prevent arbitrary detention.

Telangana High Court’s guidelines on FIRs over political speech

· FIRs based on political speech must not be registered mechanically.

· Police must verify the locus standi of complainants, conducting a preliminary inquiry before registering cognisable offences.

· Police must apply a high threshold in all speech-related cases.

· Police must seek legal opinion in sensitive matters.

· Police must refrain from action in political speech cases unless there is clear incitement to violence or a threat to public order.

· Frivolous or politically motivated complaints must be closed under Section 176(1) BNS.

· Arrests must comply with principles laid down in the Supreme Court judgment in‘Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar’ (2014).