The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition seeking registration of an FIR against a Member of Parliament over remarks referring to a “fight with the Indian State,” holding that no material was placed to establish commission of an offence under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Justice Vikram D. Chauhan upheld the concurrent findings of the trial court and revisional court, which had refused to direct registration of an FIR, noting that the allegations were based on “suspicion/imagination” without supporting material particulars.
The Court emphasised that freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution is a fundamental right, subject only to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2). It held that mere expression of views, including political dissent or criticism, does not constitute an offence unless it reaches the threshold of “incitement” falling within the ingredients of Section 152 BNS.
Examining the statutory provision, the Court noted that to attract Section 152 BNS, the speech must “excite or attempt to excite” secession, armed rebellion, or subversive activities, or endanger the sovereignty and integrity of India. In the present case, the petitioner failed to demonstrate how the impugned statement met these ingredients.
The Court further observed that the context of the speech is crucial, and in a democratic setup, elected representatives are entitled to express dissent, which may include strong political language. The expression “fight,” it held, may signify advocacy or opposition rather than incitement to rebellion.
Noting that even after considerable time no material was shown to indicate any consequence falling within Section 152 BNS, the Court held that “suspicion cannot be foundation for criminal prosecution.”
Finding no jurisdictional error in the orders of the courts below, the High Court declined to interfere under Article 227 of the Constitution and dismissed the petition
Appearances:
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dinesh Singh Yadav, Rohit Nandan Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C
