New Delhi:
The Supreme Court on Monday said that 75 years after the constitution came into force, the “at least” police should understand the freedom of speech and expression. Along with this comment, the court reserved the verdict on the petition of Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi on Monday, requesting the cancellation of the FIR lodged against him for allegedly sharing inflammatory songs.
A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuiyan underlined the importance of preserving the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 (1) (A) of the Constitution. Justice Oka said, “When it comes to freedom of speech and expression, it has to be preserved.” The judge further said, “The police will have to show some sensitivity before registering an FIR. They should read and understand (Article of the Constitution). 75 years after the constitution came into force, now at least the police have to understand the freedom of expression.
Justice Oka said that “finally it was a poem” and in fact it was going to promote non -violence. Justice Oka said, “There seems to be some problems in its translation. It is not against any religion. This poem indirectly says that even though someone is involved in violence, we will not indulge in violence. The poem gives this message. It is not against any particular community. ”
An FIR was lodged against Pratapgadhi on January 3 for the alleged inflammatory song during a mass wedding ceremony held in Jamnagar, Gujarat. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing on behalf of Gujarat Police, said that “road imprint” was a variety of poetry and it cannot be connected to a famous poet and writer like Faiz Ahmed Faiz. He said, “(MP’s) video message created trouble.”
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the MP, said that the video message was shared not by Pratapgadhi but his team. Mehta said that the MP will be held accountable even after uploading a video message on his social media account by his team. After hearing the arguments, the bench reserved the verdict. Sibal had earlier said that the order of the High Court is wrong in terms of law because the judge ignored the law.
The apex court on 21 January had stayed the proceedings against Pratapgadhi to post edited video of the allegedly related song and issued a notice to the Gujarat government and complainant Kishanbhai Deepakbhai Nanda on his appeal. The Congress leader challenged the Gujarat High Court’s order of January 17, in which his petition to cancel the FIR lodged against him was rejected, saying that the investigation was still in the initial stage.
Pratapgarhi, the national president of the Minority Cell of the Congress, was booked under Section 196 (promoting enmity among various groups on the basis of religion, caste etc.) and 197 (allegations that harm national unity, claims). In a 46 -second video clip uploaded by Pratapgarhi on ‘X’, when he was walking, he was raining flower petals. During this time a song was playing in the background. It was alleged in the FIR that the lyrics of this song are inflammatory, harmful to national unity and hurting religious sentiments.
In his petition to cancel the FIR and bypass, he claimed that the poem has “the message of love and non -violence”. Pratapgarhi said that an FIR was registered to harass him. Pratapgarhi also claimed that he was implicated due to being a member of the Congress.
6
