The Supreme Court of India has reaffirmed the importance of free speech while quashing an FIR filed against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi over a poem he shared on social media.
The court emphasised that freedom of expression is a fundamental right and should not be assessed based on the perspectives of individuals who feel insecure or threatened by differing opinions.
Delivering a strong rebuke to the Gujarat Police, the bench, comprising Justice AS Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, stated that freedom of expression is an integral part of a healthy, civilised society.
The court observed that without this freedom, it would be impossible to uphold the dignity of life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The justices highlighted that literature, poetry, drama, art, and satire play a crucial role in enriching society and should not be stifled by arbitrary restrictions.
The case against Pratapgarhi was registered in Gujarat after he uploaded a poem on social media with the background score of the song Ae Khoon Ke Pyase Baat Suno.
Some individuals alleged that the poem was a veiled criticism of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government. The Gujarat High Court had earlier refused to quash the FIR, prompting Pratapgarhi to seek relief from the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court’s ruling also carries significance in light of the ongoing controversy surrounding comedian Kunal Kamra, who is facing a defamation case for calling Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde a "traitor" during a parody performance.
The court noted that 75 years after India's independence, the country must not be so fragile in its democratic values that a mere poem, satire, or stand-up comedy act is perceived as a threat to communal harmony.
Criticising the Gujarat High Court for upholding the FIR, the Supreme Court reminded both the judiciary and the police of their duty to protect constitutional rights.
The justices emphasised that courts must be committed to upholding fundamental rights, even when they personally disagree with the content of speech or expression.
The bench warned against misusing laws meant to prevent enmity among communities, stating that restrictions on free speech should be reasonable and not arbitrary.
Follow us
