Punjab and Haryana High Court quashes FIR against Tajinder Bagga in case registered for remarks against Arvind Kejriwal

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday quashed the hate speech and criminal intimidation case registered against BJP leader Tajinder Pal Singh Bagga by the Punjab police for remarks allegedly threatening Arvind Kejriwal for the latter's views on the movie 'The Kashmir Files' [Tejinder Pal Singh Bagga v State of Punjab & Anr]..A bench of Justice Anoop Chitkara noted that it was a fit case where continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law and, therefore, invoked its inherent power to quash the FIR."Merely because the language used by the petitioner is unrefined, it shall not be sufficient to import hatred, detestation, or slander to its contents. There is nothing in the statement to take the speech as an insult or threat, or an attempt to vilify the members of the targeted group or that it stigmatized them," the Court observed..Bagga was booked by the Punjab Police for offences under Sections 153A (promoting enmity between religious groups), 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code.Bagga has been vocal on social media including Twitter against Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal over his views on the movie 'The Kashmir Files'.A complaint was filed against Bagga in Mohali after his statements..As per the plea, the petitioner gave an interview on March 30 to media wherein he made the following statement,“Aaj jo unhone kaha hai uske liye unhe maafi mangni chaiye. Agar wo maafi nahi mangte to Bhartiya Janta Yuva Morcha ka ye Karyakarta unhe jine nahi dega. - Hum sab tab tak apna pradarshan jaari rakhenge jab tak vo is desh ke hinduoon se maafi nahi maang lete, ye kehne ke liye ki es desh ke hinduoon ka narsanhaar hua tha Kashmir mein wo jhutha tha. (He should apologize for what he has said today. If he doesn’t apologize, then this BJP worker will not let him live. They would continue their agitation till the time he apologizes to the Hindus of this country for his statement that the genocide of Hindus in Kashmir was a lie)."This particular interview got wide public attention and the petitioner also posted the same on his Twitter handle and social media.Baggaa was initially taken into custody from Delhi by Punjab Police on May 6 and was being taken to Punjab when the Haryana and Delhi Police intervened and brought him back to Delhi.Subsequently, Punjab Police had obtained arrest warrant against Bagga..Bagga then approached the High Court through advocates Anil Mehta and Mayank Aggarwal.In his plea, Bagga contended that the case is vexatious and borne out of political vendetta.He also contended that his custody is not required for probe since the evidence which forms the basis of the proceedings, is electronic in nature.It was also highlighted that he is not a flight risk since he has deep roots in the society..Advocate for petitioner, argued that the words spoken by no stretch of the imagination would mean or imply assassination or criminal intimidation. Further, no material in the complaint disclosed the commission of any cognizable offence, and, therefore, the registration of FIR was illegal.The counsel for State of Punjab contended that if the Court quashes the FIR, it would amount to disallowing the police to do its statutory obligation to investigate a crime of severe ramifications because the petitioner propagated hate speech.The counsel for complainant alleged that all the ingredients of the penal offences invoked in FIR are fully engrained in the complaint, and it is not the stage for quashing the FIR..The Court, however, opined that if a gangster, mafia, or a recidivist makes a statement that he will not let somebody live, the first probable reasonable assumption that is likely to be drawn is a threat to assassinate.However, an ordinary person, like a nagging spouse or a disgruntled boss, making such a statement in response to the doing or undoing of something, it would altogether have a different first impression, the Court said."The petitioner’s statement did not seek an armed rebellion and was not a call to assault," the Court observed..Being a political activist and an official spokesperson of a political party, as a shadow of the incumbent, it was well within his rights to make the people aware of the response of an opposite political leader, the Court said."Democracy is all about informing the people and creating sentiments, and it would be an offence only if campaigning is full of hatred, or there is an involvement in malicious activities, or derogatory and vicious statements are made to gain political mileage," the order said..According to the petitioner, the movie, ‘The Kashmir Files’, had exposed the genocide of a minority, i.e., Hindus, in Kashmir. Thereby, he had put forth his displeasure because the party in power did not accept his demand to make the movie tax-free and it was well within his rights to raise such protests, the Court further added."Every post of the petitioner will not give territorial jurisdiction to the State of Punjab to investigate in the guise of the present FIR. Had the investigating agency of another State been given that much leverage, it would impact the federal structure under the Indian Constitution, where every State has the right to maintain law and order within its territorial boundaries," said the Court on jurisdiction aspect..Senior Advocates Randeep Singh Rai and Chetan Mittal along with Advocates Gautam Dutt, Anil Mehta, Mr. Mayank Aggarwal and NK Verma appeared for Bagga.Senior Advocate Puneet Bali appeared for the State of Punjab.Senior Advocate Akshay Bhan represented the complainant..[Read Order]