2021 Supreme(SC) 160

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
L. NAGESWARA RAO, S. RAVINDRA BHAT, JJ.
Patricia Mukhim – Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya and Others – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 141 of 2021, SLP (Crl.) No. 103 of 2021
Decided On : 25-03-2021

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Gist of offence under Section 153 A IPC is intention to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of people. Intention has to be judged primarily by language of piece of writing and circumstances in which it was written and published.
(2) Disapprobation of governmental inaction cannot be branded as an attempt to promote hatred between different communities – Free speech of citizens of this country cannot be stifled by implicating them in criminal cases, unless such speech has tendency to affect public order.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 153-A and 505 (1) (c) – Promoting social disharmony and public mischief – Gist of offence under Section 153 A IPC is intention to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of people – Intention has to be judged primarily by language of piece of writing and circumstances in which it was written and published – Matter complained of within ambit of Section 153A must be read as a whole – One cannot rely on strongly worded and isolated passages for proving charge nor indeed can one take a sentence here and a sentence there and connect them by a meticulous process of inferential reasoning – Under Section 505 (2) promotion of such feeling should have been done by making a publication or circulating any statement or report containing rumour or alarming news. Mens rea was held to be a necessary ingredient for offence under Section 153-A and Section 505 (2) – Common factor of both sections being promotion of feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious or racial or linguistics or religious groups or castes or communities, it is necessary that at least two such groups or communities should be involved. (Paras 10 and 11)

(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 153-A, 500 and 505 (1) (c) – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Promoting social disharmony, defamation and public mischief – Uploading of offensive Facebook Post – Rejection of quashing petition by High Court – Brutal attack on non-tribals was highlighted calling for suitable action against culprits – Appellant asserted her right guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) of Constitution of India – She voiced her concern about criminal prosecution resulting in a chilling effect on her fundamental right to free speech – Only where written or spoken words have tendency of creating public disorder or disturbance of law and order or affecting public tranquility, law needs to step in to prevent such an activity – Intention to cause disorder or incite people to violence is sine qua non of offence under Section 153 A IPC and prosecution has to prove existence of mens rea in order to succeed – Close scrutiny of Facebook post would indicate that agony of Appellant was directed against apathy shown by Chief Minister of Meghalaya, Director General of Police and Dorbar Shnong of area in not taking any action against culprits who attacked non-tribals youngsters – Appellant referred to attacks on non-tribals in 1979 – At the most, Facebook post can be understood to highlight discrimination against non-tribals in State of Meghalaya – However, Appellant made it clear that criminal elements have no community and immediate action has to be taken against persons who had indulged in brutal attack on non-tribal youngsters playing basketball – Facebook post pleads for equality of non-tribals in State of Meghalaya – There was no intention on part of Appellant to promote class/community hatred – It was a call for justice - for action according to law, which every citizen has a right to expect and articulate – Disapprobation of governmental inaction cannot be branded as an attempt to promote hatred between different communities – Free speech of citizens of this country cannot be stifled by implicating them in criminal cases, unless such speech has tendency to affect public order – As there is no attempt made by Appellant to incite people belonging to a community to indulge in any violence, basic ingredients of offence under Sections 153 A and 505 (1) (c) have not been made out – Where allegations made in FIR or complaint, even if they are taken on their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against accused, FIR is liable to be quashed – Judgment of High Court set aside and FIR quashed. (Paras 6, 9, 13, 15 and 16)

Facts of the case:

Present Appeal is filed against the rejection of an application filed by the Appellant under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing FIR Laban PS Case No.72(7)2020 dated 06.07.2020 registered under Sections 153 A, 500 and 505 (1) (c) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Findings of Court:

India is a plural and multicultural society. The promise of liberty, enunciated in the Preamble, manifests itself in various provisions which outline each citizen’s rights; they include the right to free speech, to travel freely and settle (subject to such reasonable restrictions that may be validly enacted) throughout the length and breadth of India. At times, when in the legitimate exercise of such a right, individuals travel, settle down or carry on a vocation in a place where they find conditions conducive, there may be resentments, especially if such citizens prosper, leading to hostility or possibly violence. In such instances, if victims voice their discontent, and speak out, especially if State authorities turn a blind eye, or drag their feet, such voicing of discontent is really a cry for anguish, for justice denied – or delayed. This is exactly what appears to have happened in this case.

Result : Appeal allowed.