Allahabad High Court refuses to quash Section 153A case against UP MLA Abbas Ansari for threatening government officials with payback

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday refused to quash a hate speech case initiated against Uttar Pradesh MLA Abbas Ansari under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for certain remarks made by him at a public rally [Abbas Ansari and Anr. vs State of UP].Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh stated that the inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) should be used only in exceptional cases where an offence is not disclosed. Whether or not an offence under Section 153A IPC is attracted would depend on the quality of the evidence led by the prosecution during trial, the Court said.."The scope of power under Section 482 CrPC is limited, and it should be exercised in exceptional cases where the complaint or charge sheet does not disclose any offence. Whether the offence under Section 153-A IPC gets attracted or not, would depend on the quality of evidence lead by the prosecution during trial," the Court said..The case against Ansari, an MLA belonging to Suheldev Bharatiya Samaj Party, was registered for offences under Sections 171F, 506, 186, 189, 153A and 120B of the IPC for allegedly threatening government officials with payback if the Samajwadi Party (SP) and Suheldev Bharatiya Samaj Party (SBSP) alliance came to power..Ansari moved the High Court challenging the chargesheet and the summons issued to him on the ground that the alleged statement would not constitute an offence under Section 153A..Advocate Upendra Upadhyay stated that for an offence to be constituted under Section 153A, there must be an intention to create disorder or incite violence. In this particular case, the statement was directed towards the government and not towards any specific community, religion, caste, language, or regional group. .He argued that, in proper perspective, the provisions of Section 153A IPC did not apply to the statement made and that taking cognizance for an offence under this section was illegal. He, therefore, sought the setting aside of the cognizance order and the chargesheet..Additional Advocate General MC Chaturvedi said that the statement made by Ansari was not only directed against the government machinery but also against law-abiding citizens and communities..He said that the offence against Section 153A was clearly attracted as the petitioner was sure that the Samajwadi Party lead by Akhilesh Yadav would occupy the seat of power in the State of Uttar Pradesh and, therefore, he made the threatening statement, which had propensity to disturb the public order..The Court noted that under Section 153A, the prosecution has to prove the existence of mens rea in order to succeed as held by the Supreme Court in Balwant Singh and Anr vs State of Punjab..Thus, it said the question of proving mens rea to incite people to violence or cause disorder is to be proved during trial by leading evidence by the prosecution and added that if prima facie, the act, sign or words have propensity to disturb public order or incite people to violence, proceedings under Section 153A of IPC cannot be quashed at the threshold. ."The unity and integrity of the Nation cannot be overlooked and slighted, as acts that promote or are likely to promote divisiveness, alienation and schematism do directly and indirectly impinge on diversity and pluralism. When such acts are done with the objective and intent to cause public disorder or to demean dignity of the targeted groups, they have to be dealt with as per law and such an act would attract the offence under Section 153-A IPC," the Court further stated..Thus, it dismissed the petition..[Read Order]