IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Md. Taher Ahmed Barbhuiya - Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam - Respondent
Crl. Pet. 607 of 2021
Decided on : 21-03-2022
Constitution of India,1950 – Article 226 and 227 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 – 173 and 482 - U/S 120(B)/153(A)/505(1)(c)/505(2) IPC read with Section 39 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 –Wrong post on Facebook - Committed atrocities against women - It is to be mentioned here in that aforementioned FIR has been lodged by one, S.I. of Police of Police Station, alleging inter-alia amongst others petitioner has uploaded one incriminating post in his Facebook Account and same was discovered by Social Media Cell of Police Station of which complainant is one of member - Name of the Facebook profile user is Advocate having URL - Petitioner has posted in said post "EkItihash Srishti Holo, Taliban Jindabad" which means "A history has been created, long live Taliban" - It is also alleged in FIR that post has praised and glorified 'Tehreek-e-Taliban' who was in fact are terrorists and have waged prolonged violent war against a democratically elected Govt. in Afghanistan - It is also stated that they have targeted Indian citizens through violent means; committed atrocities against women & girls and provided patronage to drug trafficking and have been promoting terrorism from Afghanistan and they have also forged alliance with groups, states and interests which are bent on creating chaos and committing terrorist attack in India in order to destabilize our country - Whether allegations in FIR disclose commission of a cognizable offence or not.
Finding of the Court: Since this court is not entitled to embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in FIR/complaint as held in point No. V of guidelines laid down in case of Niharika Infrastructure (supra), it cannot be said that assertions made in FIR are unbelievable - In given facts and circumstances on record, and in view of submissions made at the Bar, court of the considered opinion that assertions made in FIR, in fact discloses commission of a cognizable offence by the petitioner - At this initial stage it cannot be said that the action incorporated in Clause (a), (b), and (c) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 39 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act is not done with intention to further activities of terrorist organization - It is only in cases where no cognizable offence or offence of any kind is disclosed in first information report that Court will not permit an investigation to go on as held in point No.(III) in case of Niharika Infrastructure (supra), and in point in the case of Bhajanlal (supra) – Court of view that ratios laid down therein are not applicable in all force to present case.
Result : Petition dismissed
JUDGMENT :
This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973, read with Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is preferred by Md. Taher Ahmed Barbhuiya of Lala Chandrapur District Hailakandi for quashing of the FIR of Lala P.S. Case No. 490/2021, U/S 120 (B)/153(A)/505(1)(c)/ 505(2) IPC R/W Section 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 against the petitioner.
2. It is to be mentioned here in that the aforementioned FIR has been lodged by one Saleh Ahmed Laskar, S.I. of Police of Hailakandi Police Station on 26.08.2021, alleging inter-alia amongst others that on 21.08.2021, the petitioner has uploaded one incriminating post in his Facebook Account and the same was discovered by the Social Media Cell of Hailakandi Police Station of which the complainant is one of the member. The name of the Facebook profile user is Advocate Taher Ahmed Barbhuiya having URL https://www.facebook.com/ taherahmed.barbhuiya.9. The petitioner has posted in the said post “Ek Itihash Srishti Holo, Taliban Jindabad” which means “A history has been created, long live Taliban”. It is also alleged in the FIR that the post has praised and glorified ‘Tehreek-e-Taliban’ who was in fact are terrorists and have waged prolonged violent war against a democratically elected Govt. in Afghanistan. It is also stated that they have targeted Indian citizens through violent means; committed atrocities against women & girls and provided patronage to drug trafficking and have been promoting terrorism from Afghanistan and they have also forged alliance with groups, states and interests which are bent on creating chaos and committing terrorist attack in India in order to destabilize our country. It is further alleged that the petitioner in criminal conspiracy with other like-minded persons, through his communal social media posts, is promoting enmity and disharmony on the ground of religion and communities. It is also stated that the petitioner has circulated as such toxic statements with intent to incite a community to commit offence against other class or communities and the petitioner has circulated such statement containing rumors with intent to create and promote feelings of enmity, hatred and ill will between different religious groups and communities on the ground of religion. It is further alleged that ‘Tehreek-e-Taliban’ is mentioned in the List established and maintained pursuant to Security Council Resolution 1267/1989/2253 at QDe.132(d) and it attracts provisions under UAP Act vide Entry Number 33 of the First Schedule. It is also stated that the petitioner, with the intention to further the activity of a terrorist organization, has also invited support for the terrorist organization through his social media posts.
3. Upon the said FIR, the O/C Lala P.S. has registered a Case being Lala P.S. Case No. 490/2021, U/S 120(B)/153(A)/505(1)(c)/505(2) IPC read with Section 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and endorsed DSP Headquarter Nabanita Das to investigate the same. While the investigation is in progress, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present petition for quashing the aforementioned FIR on the following grounds:-
(ii) That, he criticized the Taliban and applauded the American soldier for the rescue mission;
(iii) That, he has been falsely entangled in the aforesaid police case;
(iv) That, the contents of the facebook posts as mentioned in the FIR is an edited version and manufactured and circulated in his name by some unknown persons;
(v) That, he has not deleted any of the post relating to situation in Aghanistan;
(vi) That, Section 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 is
FIR quashed - Through Facebook ID, posted objectionable material - Religious sentiments - Petitioner has shared post of other person, even, contents of FIR does not, prima facie, establish alleged of....
Point of law: The extreme that the High Court thought that in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, it could quash a First Information Report. The police had not even com....
The main legal point established in this judgment is that the appellant's Facebook posts do not constitute the alleged offenses under the Indian Penal Code and that Section 124A IPC is under challeng....
Right to express one’s views is a protected and cherished right in our democracy. Merely because the point of view of Petitioner is extreme or harsh will not make it a hate speech as it is only expre....
The court held that the intent behind tweets must be assessed carefully, and freedom of speech is subject to reasonable restrictions to maintain public order and national integrity.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.