Summary
The Supreme Court quashed the FIR against journalist Patricia Mukhim for a Facebook post demanding action after an attack on non-tribal youths in Meghalaya. Read as a whole and in context, the post called for equality and lawful accountability, expressly rejecting community identification of criminals. It did not disclose the intention or incitement required for the charged communal-hatred offences. Criticism of official inaction could not on these facts be treated as hate speech.
Issues
- Whether the Facebook post, read in full and in context, disclosed offences under sections 153A and 505(1)(c) IPC justifying continuation of the FIR.
Provisions considered
- Sections 153A and 505(1)(c), Indian Penal Code, 1860The full post demanded equal protection and lawful action rather than promoting communal hatred or inciting one community to offences against another. (¶¶ 8-13, 15)
- Article 19(1)(a) and (2), Constitution of IndiaProtected criticism and demands for justice had to be distinguished from speech warranting reasonable restriction on the recognised grounds. (¶¶ 6, 8, 14-15)
- Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Quashing was warranted where the allegations accepted in their entirety failed to establish the relevant offence ingredients. (¶¶ 1, 5, 13, 16)
Held
- For section 153A, the requisite intention must be assessed primarily from the language and publication circumstances. The material must be read as a whole; selected emphatic passages cannot be stitched together to establish the offence. The reasonable-person standard governs assessment of the expression. (¶ 9-11)
- The post’s criticism targeted official apathy following the assault and sought equal protection for non-tribals. It expressly stated that criminals have no community and called for action under law. It did not intend communal hatred or attempt to incite community violence, so sections 153A and 505(1)(c) were not made out. (¶ 13-15)
- A citizen’s demand for justice and disapproval of governmental inaction cannot be equated with promotion of inter-community hatred merely on an imagined possibility of communal conflict. The allegations, even taken at face value in their entirety, justified quashing here. (¶ 13-16)
Result
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside. FIR in Laban Police Station Case 72(7)2020 dated 6 July 2020 quashed.