Bombay High Court imposes ₹25k costs on Maharashtra for "unjustified" arrest of Congress worker who criticised BJP minister; quashes FIRs

Law cannot be used as a tool of oppression to harass people by intimidating them from expressing their opinion, the Bombay High Court observed on Monday while quashing cases against a Congress worker who had put up a post on social media against BJP leader and minister Chandrakant Patil [Sandeep Arjun Kudale v. State of Maharashtra].A bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and PK Chavan also imposed costs of ₹25,000 on the State government for the "unjustified arrest" of the petitioner Sandeep Kudale. The Court said that Section 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on various grounds) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) should not be used to stifle dissent. “Law cannot be used as a tool or as an instrument of oppression, by registering FIRs, to harass people by preventing/intimidating them, from expressing their views/opinions/dissent, which the Constitution of India, guarantees to them. The right to express one’s views is a protected and cherished right in our democracy and cannot be taken away by imposition of Section 153A of the IPC and by arresting a person as done in the present case. Section 153A cannot be resorted to silence people from expressing their views/opinions/dissent, so long as Article 19(2) (reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech) is not violated” the Court held.It also noted that cases under Section 153A are on the rise and the onus is on the police and the State government to ensure that the said provision is not misused by anyone, much less political parties. .By way of background, two first information reports (FIRS) came to be registered against Kudale, for uploading a video-clip on social media, in which he allegedly made some derogatory remarks against minister Patil.Kudale had posted the video to criticise what he claimed to be Patil's alleged objectionable remarks against social reformers Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, Mahatma Jyotiba Phule and Karmaveer Bhaurao Patil.He was then booked under Sections 153A of IPC. .After examining the videos uploaded, the Court observed that prima facie perusal of the content showed no offence made out against Kudale. Admittedly, there was no unlawful assembly and rioting.“The contents of the video if read in its entirety and in the background in which the same were made, does not show that the petitioner, an ordinary citizen, affiliated to a political party, had any malafide intention or the requisite mens rea necessary to constitute the alleged offences,” the Court noted..The Court also noted that Kudale had only expressed his dissenting opinion by condemning what was stated by the minister. “The said comments expressed by the petitioner, were clearly his opinion/criticism of the Minister’s speech, registering his protest to the same and by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be an act intended to cause disorder or to incite people to violence, which is a sine qua non to constitute an offence under Section 153A of the IPC. Merely because the petitioner’s comments hurt the complainant’s sensibilities, was not a ground for the police to register the FIRs, much less arrest him,” the Court held..The Court also deduced that Kudale’s language and words used by him could at the most be considered distasteful but certainly not something that warranted registration of FIR, much less his arrest. “It is the duty of the police to maintain law and order and the same cannot be done by invoking Section 153A so lightly, on the pretext, on which, it is done,” the Court held. .The Court, therefore, quashed both the FIRs and also directed the State government to pay costs of ₹25,000 to Kudale for his unjustified arrest.The costs were directed to be recovered from the salary of the police officials who were responsible for registration of FIR..Advocates Subodh Desai and Lokesh Zade appeared for Kudale. Advocate General Birendra Saraf with chief public prosecutor Aruna Pai appeared for the State. [Read Order]