Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. Gavai, Sandeep Mehta, JJ.
Shiv Prasad Semwal - Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No(s). 1708 of 2024 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No(s). 3687 of 2020)
Decided On : 19-03-2024
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 153A, 500, 501, 504, 34 and 120B – Defamation, insult and conspiracy – Criminal Writ Petition – Entire case as set out in impugned FIR is based on allegation that Facebook news post uploaded by one journalist was caused to be published on news portal being operated by appellant – There is no reference to any group or groups of people in the article – Publication focuses totally on complainant imputing that he had encroached upon public land where foundation stone laying ceremony was proposed at hands of Chief Minister of Uttarakhand – Post was aimed at frustrating proposed foundation stone laying ceremony on land of which complainant claims to be the true owner – Post also imputes that person who was planning foundation stone ceremony was an enemy of mountains and had no concern with well-being of mountains – Foundational facts essential to constitute offence under Section 153A IPC are totally lacking from allegations as set out in FIR – Allegations qua subsidiary offences under Sections 34 and 120B IPC would also be non est – There is no allegation in FIR that accused tried to extract any wrongful gain or valuable security from complainant on the basis of mischievous/malicious post – Allowing continuance of proceedings pursuant to impugned FIR against appellant is nothing but gross abuse of process of law because allegations as set out in FIR do not disclose necessary ingredients of any cognizable offence – Impugned FIR and all proceedings sought to be taken against appellant quashed and set aside. (Paras 22, 27, 28, 30, 31 and 33)
Facts of the case:
Appellant assails Order dated 20th July, 2020 passed by Single Judge of High Court of Uttarakhand whereby Criminal Writ Petition preferred by appellant for assailing FIR registered for offences punishable under Sections 153A, 500, 501, 504, 34 and 120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 was dismissed.
Findings of Court:
Complainant has also alleged in the FIR that accused intended to blackmail him by publishing the news article in question. However, there is no allegation in FIR that accused tried to extract any wrongful gain or valuable security from the complainant on the basis of the mischievous/malicious post.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Mehta, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant herein calls into question the order dated 20th July, 2020 passed by the learned Single Judge of High Court of Uttarakhand whereby Criminal Writ Petition No. 881 of 2020 preferred by the appellant for assailing FIR No. 31 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 153A, 500, 501, 504, 34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860(hereinafter being referred to as the ‘IPC’) at P.S. Muni Ki Reti, District Tehri Garhwal was dismissed.
3. Shorn of details, the facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal are noted hereinbelow.
4. The respondent No.3 Shri Rajeev Savara filed a complaint to the SHO P.S. Muni Ki Reti, District Tehri Garhwal alleging inter alia that he owns land admeasuring 1.196 hectares(approximately 15.94 bighas) situated on National Highway No. 7 at village Singthali, Tehsil Narendra Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal, Uttarakhand. He had formed a trust by the name, Savara Foundation of which he is the founder and also Chairman of the Board of Trustees. He claimed to be an internationally recognised domain expert of pre-modern, modern visual and decorative Indian arts, having served on the advisory boards of various art galleries and museums.
5. The complainant had planned a foundation stone laying ceremony of ‘Matra Ashraya-A collection museum’ on the said land/property to be done by the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Uttarakhand, namely, Mr. Trivendra Singh Rawat, in the presence of Juna Peethadheeshwar Acharya Mahamandaleshwar Swami Avdheshanand Ji Maharaj. The event was scheduled on 20th March, 2020.
6. It was alleged in the complaint that in order to blackmail the complainant, the accused named in the aforesaid FIR, acting in collusion, got published a news article in the e-newspaper ‘Parvatjan’, edition dated 17th March, 2020 wherein it was portrayed that the land on which the foundation stone was proposed to be laid was Government land which had been unlawfully occupied/encroached upon by the complainant. The complainant alleged that even his invitation was published in the defamatory news article. It was further alleged that the imputations were made in the news article with the intent and knowledge that the same would irreparably tarnish the reputation of the complainant and his standing in the public domain.
7. The complainant asserted that the sole objective of the publication was to incite breach of peace. The article was published without undertaking proper fact-finding exercise which as per the complainant, would have conclusively and indisputably established that he had not encroached upon Government land and that the plot in question was lawfully owned and occupied by the complainant. In this manner, the accused caused serious damage to the goodwill, reputation and standing of the complainant in the society. As per the complainant, the act of publication of the mischievous and malicious news article by the accused invited invocation of the offences punishable under Sections 153A, 500, 501, 504 read with Sections 34 and 120B IPC.
8. Based on the said complaint, FIR No. 31 of 2020 came to be registered at P.S. Muni Ki Reti, District Tehri Garhwal, Uttarakhand for the above offences.
9. The appellant filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 881 of 2020 in the High Court of Uttarakhand for challenging the said FIR claiming to be completely innocent and taking a plea that the allegations made in the FIR did not disclose commission of any cognizable offence. It was averred in the petition that the news article which had been published in the e-newspaper Parvatjan of which the appellant herein was the Director, was entirely based on the Facebook post of a journalist named Gunanand Jakhmola and as such, the appellant herein was not liable to face prosecution for the said publication.
10. As stated above, the High Court proceeded to dismiss the criminal writ petition filed by the appellant vide order dated 20th July, 2020 which is challenged in this appe
The court established that mere expressions of political support do not constitute an offence under Section 153A IPC unless they promote enmity between distinct groups.
The FIR lacks necessary ingredients for offences under Section 196(1)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, justifying its quashing due to vagueness.
Defamatory news item - publication of the news item on the basis of statement made by the cousin and brother of Akhter Hussain, does not amount to offence under section 499 RPC as the petitioner has ....
Prosecution under Section 153A of the IPC requires specific allegations of individual involvement and prior government sanction; failure to establish these voids proceedings.
Point of Law : The word 'Promote' does not imply mere describing and narrating a fact, or giving opinion, criticising the point of view or actions of another person.
The legal point established is that to prosecute under Section 153 IPC, the act must be illegal, malignantly done, and result in a situation causing riot. Good faith publication by an editor is not i....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
