Police must understand free speech at least after 75 years of Constitution: Supreme Court on FIR against Congress MP

The Supreme Court on Monday observed that police must understand the meaning of freedom and expression at least after 75 years of coming into force of the Constitution of India..The Bench of Justice AS Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan made the comment while reserving its decision on Congress Member of Parliament (MP) Imran Pratapgarhi's petition seeking quashing of a case registered against him over a poem uploaded by him on social media."This is the problem - now nobody has any respect for creativity. If you read it plainly it says that even if you suffer injustice, suffer it with love, even if people die, we will accept it," Justice Oka remarked..After going through translation of the poem, the Court said the social media post was advocating non-violence. It added that the police must show some sensitivity. The post did not have anything do with religion or any anti-national activity, the Court further remarked.When Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for State of Gujarat, argued that social media is a "dangerous tool" and people must act responsibly, the Court said,"75 years after the existence of the constitution, freedom of speech and expression at least now has to be understood by the police."Adding to the observation, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal said,"...and by the court!".Sibal, representing Pratapgarhi, was alluding to the Gujarat High Court ruling dismissing the Congress MP's petition. However, Mehta took exception to the submission."My lords may kindly not travel that path... I have no other agenda in this matter."However, Justice Oka said that free speech has to be upheld. "See when it comes to freedom of speech and expression, there can't be agenda. We have to uphold that. Our worry is at least at least efforts have to be made to understand what is the meaning of the poem. That's our worry," the top court judge remarked..75 years after the existence of the constitution, freedom of speech and expression at least now has to be understood by the policeSupreme Court .Pratapgarhi was booked by the police in Gujarat on a complaint moved by an advocate's clerk. According to the Deccan Herald, it was alleged that the Congress MP had posted a video on social media with a poem "ae khoon ke pyase baat suno..." running in the background.Gujarat Police invoked Sections 197 (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration), 299 (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting it religion or religious beliefs) and 302 (Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound religious feelings of any person) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) against him.Pratapgarhi approached the Supreme Court after Gujarat High Court on January 17 refused to quash the FIR. ."As the investigation is at a very nascent stage, I find no reason to exercise my powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India," Justice Sandeep N Bhat had said in the order.The single-judge also remarked that the responses received to the social media post indicate that message was posted in a manner "which certainly create disturbance in social harmony.""It is expected from any citizen of India that he should behave in a manner where the communal harmony or social harmony should not be disturbed and the petitioner, who is a Member of Parliament, is expected to behave in some more restricted manner as he is expected to know more about the repercussions of such post," the High Court said.The top court in January stayed proceedings in the case against the Congress MP..Before the top court reserved its decision today, the hearing in Pratapgarhi's case also witnessed lighter moments with Mehta dropping names of revolutionary Urdu poets Faiz Ahmad Faiz and Habib Jalib.Mehta on a lighter side said he was objecting to Pratapgarhi's counter affidavit attributing the poem to these poets.He added that Faiz's poems are much more revolutionary. "The level of this can never be Faiz or Habib Jalib," he added..Mehta called the post uploaded by Pratapgarhi as 'sadakchaap'. "It's not a poem. It's a sadakchaap (insignificant/poor). Poem means poem," Mehta said.At this, Sibal alluding to his own tryst with poetry said,"My poems are also sadakchaap."However, Mehta responded,"No, his (Sibal's) poems are really good!"At this, Justice Oka alluded to his retirement in May."I told my brother (Justice Bhuyan) in a lighter vein don't call your poems as sadakchaap because you'll have to write one poem for me at the end of May. So please don't say that.".People say you have to fall in love to be a poet. I have never.SG Tushar Mehta .SG Mehta said he would not call Pratapgarhi's post even a poem."I don't admit it's a poem. Why? Sher kabhi accha ya bura nahi hota; ya hota hai ya nahi hota," he said.At this, Justice Oka said,"Now you want to compete with him? In writing poems?"Mehta responded that he was only quoting someone. However, Justice Oka said Mehta was capable of writing poems."He is, he is. He's just not trying. He has a wealth of knowledge in this area," Sibal then said.Justice Oka then remarked that Mehta may not have time for it. Mehta at this said,"No, I have time. People say you have to fall in love to be a poet. I have never."The Court then proceeded to reserve the decision..[Read Order]