Criticizing government can never be sedition: Uttarakhand High Court calls for CBI probe into corruption allegations against CM TS Rawat

The Uttarakhand High Court on Tuesday called for a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into allegations of corruption levelled against the State's Chief Minister, TS Rawat..While doing so, the Court allowed a plea filed by journalist Umesh Sharma to quash an FIR filed against him this year for publishing a video containing these allegations (Umesh Kumar Sharma v. State of Uttarakhand and anr)..The Bench of Justice Ravindra Maithani opined in its order, ."This Court is of the view that considering the nature of allegations levelled against Trivendra Singh Rawat, the Chief Minister of the State, it would be appropriate to unfold the truth. It would be in the interest of the State that the doubts are cleared. Therefore, while allowing the petition, this Court proposes for investigation also."Uttarakhand High Court.What did Umesh Sharma allege?.In a video released in June this year, Sharma had alleged that an amount of Rs 25 lakh was paid as bribe to Chief Minister Trivendra Singh Rawat by one Amratesh Singh Chauhan for his appointment as Chairman of the Gau Seva Ayog, Jharkhand. Rawat was the BJP's State in-charge of Jharkhand at the time, circa 2016. This amount was alleged to have been deposited into various bank accounts, including those of Dr Harender Singh Rawat and his wife Savita Rawat. In his June 2020 video, Sharma asserted that Savita Rawat was Trivendra Singh's sister, making Dr Harender Singh Rawat his brother-in-law..The FIR quashed by the High Court.Dr HS Rawat sent a communication dated July 7, 2020, to the police seeking an inquiry into the allegations made by Sharma in his social media post. An inquiry report was compiled by the police on July 30. On July 31, Dr Rawat filed a Right to Information (RTI) application seeking the status of his communication-request. On that same day, FIR 265 of 2020 was lodged against Sharma at a Dehradun Police Station, based on the July 30 report. The FIR listed various offences against Umesh Sharma for making corruption allegations tying Dr HS Rawat and Savita Rawat to Chief Minister TS Rawat in his video. Sharma was accused of cheating, forgery, conspiracy and allied offences. .Finding that none of these offences are prima facie made out against Sharma, the High Court has now quashed this FIR.In the course of its judgment, the Court also opined that there appeared to be malafide intent motivating the case, given the speed at which it was filed against Sharma "coupled with the facts that the allegations levelled in the FIR were within the notice of the State as well as the informant much earlier in the year 2019.".Other FIRs.By this time, certain other FIRs were also pending against Sharma, including for sting operations and similar allegations of corruption levelled against the State's Chief Minister. In 2018, Umesh Sharma's colleague at news outlet Samachar Plus, Pandit Ayush Gaur, lodged FIR 100 of 2018 at Dehradun, alleging that Sharma was pressurising Gaur to conduct sting operations unethically to destabilize the state government and to cause disturbance and violence in the State.The same year, Amratesh Singh Chauhan (who was later accused of having bribed Chief Minister TS Rawat in the video released by Umesh Sharma) filed FIR 354 of 2018 at Ranchi, listing various offences including sedition and criminal intimidation against Sharma. Chauhan alleged that Sharma had been threatening and blackmailing him to reveal information in order to destabilise and demolish the Uttarakhand government. Then came FIR 265 of 2020, lodged following Dr HS Rawat's July 2020 communication. This FIR has now been quashed by the High Court. Notably, the Court took critical note that similar allegations of conspiracy had been levelled in the latest FIR, which was not permissible in law. The judge held,"Separate investigation on the instant FIR cannot be allowed. On this ground alone the FIR No. 265 of 2020 deserves to be quashed.".Corruption allegations must be probed for society to grow: Court.The Court opined that there were certain further issues lingering, even if the 2020 FIR against Sharma had been quashed. "Should this Court let the allegations levelled by the petitioner also sink in the memory of the people without them being investigated or should the Court suo motu take some action to get the matter investigated so as to clear the air?", the Court queried. In the course of the judgment, Justice Maithani also observed, ."People should not live under the impression that their representatives are not pure. If somebody levels false allegations which are actionable in law, the law should take its own course. If allegations of corruption levelled against the people in high positions stay in society without them being inquired and cleared, it will neither help the society to grow nor the State to function efficiently... Corruption is not something new. Corruption is such a menace which has penetrated in every realm of life. It appears as if the society has normalised it.".Having commented thus, and given the nature of the allegations made by Sharma against Chief Minister TS Rawat, the judge ordered,"In view of the nature of the allegations, this Court is of the view that the CBI should be directed to lodge an FIR on the basis of allegations levelled in para 8 of the instant petition and investigate the case in accordance with law.".Criticizing the government can never be sedition: Court.In the course of the judgment, the Court also took critical note that the State had sought to add sedition as a charge against Sharma. The High Court pointed out that as per the Supreme Court's verdict in the Kedarnath case, an activity would not be seditious unless it tends to create disorder or disturbance of public peace or involves violence.Pertinently, Justice Maithani emphasised, "Levelling false allegations against a person can never be sedition unless, it qualifies the test laid down in the case of Kedar Nath Singh (supra). If allegations are levelled against the representatives, it alone cannot be sedition." ."Criticizing the government can never be sedition. Unless the public functionaries are criticized, democracy cannot be strengthened. In democracy dissent is always respected and considered, if it is suppressed under sedition laws perhaps, it would be an attempt to make the democracy weak."Uttarakhand High Court.The judge added, "Adding Section 124-A IPC in the instant case manifests that it has been an attempt of the State, to muzzle the voice of criticism, to muffle complaint/dissent. It can never be allowed. The law does not permit it. In the instant case, whatever the allegations against the petitioner, they do not remotely connect with Section 124-A IPC. Offence under Section 124-A IPC is not, prima-facie, made out. Why this section is added, it’s beyond comprehension. Whatever is stated on behalf of the State, on this aspect, has no merit at all.".Sharma was represented by Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Shyam Divan. Senior Advocate PS Patwalia, along with Deputy Advocates General Ruchira Gupta and JS Virk appeared for the state government. Advocates Ramji Srivastava and Navneet Kaushik appeared for Dr HS Rawat..Read the Judgment: