HC refuses to quash FIR against Deoria man

Allahabad: The Allahabad

high court

has declined to quash an FIR lodged against one Iftekhar Ahmad of Deoria for allegedly sharing an objectionable post against UP chief minister Yogi Adityanath on Facebook.

The instant petition sought quashing of the FIR dated February 5, registered at police station Bhatpar-Rani, Deoria under sections 153-A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, place of birth, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Dismissing the writ petition filed by Ahmad, a division bench comprising Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Vivek Varma observed, “The web-post, which has allegedly been shared is highly objectionable. It is vastly understood and known that the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh had been associated with religious affairs of Hindu community. He is also noticed in priestly attire and in the concerned post his attire is no different.”

“Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be ruled out that such a post, at least prima facie, had the potential to heat up communal feelings which may result in disturbance of public order,” the court added.

The petitioner’s contention was that the post was not against any community or religion, but only showed morphed photo of chief minister of the state and the same was mistakenly shared by his minor son without any intention to do the same. Hence, FIR registered against him should be quashed.

However, the state government’s counsels opposed the petition on the plea that the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh is known to be a temple priest. He wears clothes which are understood by Hindu community at large to be a dress associated with a Hindu community priest. The web-post would, therefore, has the potential to fan ill-will between two religious communities. More so, it is not in dispute that the web-post had been shared.

The state government’s counsels further argued that the moment a web-post is posted and shared with friends in a Facebook account, there would be publication and a large body of persons would have access to such information, which would then have potential to fan riots and disturb public peace. Therefore, it cannot be said, at this stage, that the FIR discloses no cognizable offence.

The court after hearing concerned parties dismissed the petition while giving liberty to the petitioner to file bail application before the court below in accordance with law.