Breaking: Calcutta High Court quashes FIR against Babul Supriyo for objectionable remarks against Mahua Moitra during TV Debate

The Calcutta High Court today quashed a 2017 FIR filed against BJP Member of Parliament and Union Minister Babul Supriyo for making objectionable remarks against Trinamool Congress Party MP Mahua Moitra during a TV Debate (Babul Supriyo v. State of West Bengal and anr)..During an NDTV debate, Supriyo had commented " “Mohua, are you on Mohua?”, alluding to the alcoholic drink by the name "mohua." .An FIR was registered over the same citing Sections 509 (insulting the modesty of a woman) and 500 (punishment for defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)..Justice Bibek Chaudhuri first delved into whether an offence of insulting a woman's modesty has been made out. .On this count, the Court has said, "The penal code recognizes assault, criminal force or insult of woman’s modesty as offence. When the essence of modesty has been described as the sex of a woman, by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, by no stretch of imagination the definition can be widened to include an assault or insult on the qualities of goodness, sensitivity, gentleness, empathy etc of a woman.".Justice Chaudhuri proceeded to conclude that "the allegation in the first information report and other materials, accompanying the FIR do not disclose any cognizable offence under Section 509 of the IPC.".As far as the charge of defamation is concerned, the Court found that Supriyo's deliberate utterance "was a defamatory statement within the meaning of Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code.".the Judge added, ."It is expected from a representative of the people that he must be courteous in his behavior, dignified in his manners and cautious on his words spoken by him... By making such defamatory statement to a woman , the petitioner prima facie, not only humiliated dignity and honour of a woman, but also violated his constitutional oath. If doubt is raised in the mind of people from the utterances made by the petitioner that the at the relevant point of time she was drunken and intoxicated, this would of course an act of imputation intending to harm the reputation of the opposite party No.2 (Moitra). ".The Court also rejected the submission that the statement was an accidental slip of words which was not intended to defame Moitra..However, the Court found that there were certain procedural lapses which warranted that the Court quash the FIR. In this regard, the order notes:.Cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 500 of the IPC (punishment for defamation) cannot be taken in the absence of the complaint in writing specifically filed by the complainant before the Magistrate.In the instant case, the complainant has not made any complaint before the jurisdictional magistrate.The police did not take permission for the investigation of the allegation which discloses a non-cognizable case under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code from the jurisdictional magistrate..The Court, therefore, held,."I have no other alternative but to hold that the charge-sheet does not disclose commission of any offence under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused. Secondly, the allegations in the FIR constitute only a non-cognizable offence under Section 500 of the (IPC) and no investigation is permitted by police officer, unless a Magistrate has issue an order for the same as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thirdly, further proceedings of CGR Case No.62 of 2017 on the basis of charge-sheet No.27 dated 08.03.2017 will be abused of the process of the Court.".While quashing the FIR, however, the Court added that Moitra is at liberty to take any action, according to law, if available to her, against Babul Supriyo before the appropriate forum. ."... in such case, the learned Court below will take appropriate steps without being influenced or swayed over by any observation made by this Court in this judgment", the Court added. .Babul Supriyo was represented by Advocates Ayan Bhattacharjee, Anand Keshari, Priyanka Tibrewal, Aditya Ratan Tiwary and Danish Taslim. .Public Prosecutor Saswata Gopal Mukherjee along with Advocates Ranabir Roychowdhury and Mainak Gupta appeared for the State. Advocates Sabyasachi Banerjee and Minal Palana appeared for Mahua Moitra..Read the Judgment: