The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that the fundamental right to free expression through poetry, theatre, stage shows, satire, and art must be upheld. The judgment came in response to an appeal by Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi, challenging a criminal case filed against him by the Gujarat Police under Section 196 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which pertains to promoting disharmony.
A Bench comprising Justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan emphasised the significance of free speech in a liberal, constitutional democracy. They warned against the suppression of dissent by individuals who perceive criticism as a threat to their authority.
Justice Bhuyan underscored that while reasonable restrictions on speech exist, they must remain reasonable and not become oppressive.
The court stated that the police and government are duty-bound to protect individual rights to speech and expression.
Justice Oka highlighted the importance of literature, including poetry, drama, films, and satire, in enriching society. He maintained that freedom of thought and expression is integral to living a dignified life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Gujarat Police had accused Pratapgarhi of promoting enmity between groups on the basis of religion and caste, citing a 46-second edited video that showed flower petals being showered on the MP as he walked, accompanied by a recitation of his poem.
The FIR alleged that the poem’s lyrics were provocative and harmful to national unity. In January, the Gujarat High Court declined Pratapgarhi’s plea to quash the FIR, leading to his appeal before the Supreme Court.
During a March 3 hearing, Justice Oka had remarked that the poem’s theme of enduring injustice with love echoed the principles of non-violence advocated by Mahatma Gandhi. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta criticised the poem, calling it “sadak chaap” (cheap), and dismissed the comparison with Gandhi.
Despite the objections, the court asserted that differing interpretations of poetry should not be grounds for criminal action.
The court also criticised the tendency to stifle artistic expression. Justice Oka pointed out that the poem’s plain meaning reflected a message of non-violence. He questioned the legitimacy of having police officers interpret poetry and decide its meaning.
Shahnawaz Shaikh, National Vice Chairman of the Congress Minority Department, expressed relief at the verdict. “Pratapgarhi had attended a mass wedding ceremony in Jamnagar with all necessary permissions. Despite this, the Gujarat Police registered the case without a thorough investigation,” he told Vibes of India.
Sheikh highlighted that the High Court had refused to provide relief, but the Supreme Court ultimately upheld Pratapgarhi’s right to free speech.
The court reiterated that it is the judiciary’s duty to safeguard citizens’ fundamental rights when the government and police fail to do so. It affirmed that freedom of expression under Article 19(a) of the Constitution remains a cornerstone of democracy.
Also Read: Lokayukta Report Reveals Urgent Need For Legal Reforms To Combat Corruption
