{"id":2970,"date":"2025-04-15T16:59:38","date_gmt":"2025-04-15T11:29:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/?p=2970"},"modified":"2025-04-15T16:59:38","modified_gmt":"2025-04-15T11:29:38","slug":"supreme-court-upholds-freedom-of-expression-quashes-fir-against-imran-pratapgarhi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/supreme-court-upholds-freedom-of-expression-quashes-fir-against-imran-pratapgarhi\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court Upholds Freedom of Expression, Quashes FIR Against Imran Pratapgarhi"},"content":{"rendered":"<h1><strong>IMRAN PRATAPGADHI <\/strong>[APPELLANT]\u00a0 <strong>Vs.\u00a0 <\/strong><strong>STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR. <\/strong>[RESPONDENTS]<\/h1>\n<p>(CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1545 OF 2025)<\/p>\n<p><strong>(<\/strong>2JB, Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan JJ., delivered by<strong> ABHAY S. OKA, J.<\/strong>)<\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court of India has quashed an FIR filed against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi by the Gujarat police for posting a poem on social media. The Bench, comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, ruled that the allegations against Pratapgarhi did not constitute a cognizable offence under Section 173(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).<\/p>\n<p>The Court emphasized the fundamental right to free speech and expression, stating that a police officer must carefully assess whether spoken or written words genuinely amount to an offence before initiating criminal proceedings. The Bench asserted that freedom of thought and expression is essential to a civilized society and that restricting this right would violate Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to live with dignity.<\/p>\n<p>Justice Oka underscored that dissenting views should be met with counterarguments rather than suppression. He remarked that in a democracy, differing opinions should be debated rather than silenced. He also stressed the importance of literature, poetry, drama, films, satire, and art in enriching human life, reinforcing that courts have a duty to protect fundamental rights even when judges personally disapprove of certain expressions.<\/p>\n<p>The Court also clarified the legal standards for determining offences under Section 196 of the BNS. It ruled that the impact of written or spoken words should be judged from the perspective of a reasonable, strong-minded, and courageous individual rather than those who view criticism as a threat to power. Furthermore, Justice Oka reminded police officers that they are bound by the Constitution and must uphold ideals of liberty and freedom of thought as enshrined in the Preamble.<\/p>\n<p>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta inquired about the relevance of Article 192, to which Justice Oka responded that cases involving written words should be assessed under Section 173 to protect fundamental rights. Justice Bhuyan further emphasized that restrictions under Article 19(2) must be reasonable and not arbitrary, oppressive, or excessive.<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court had earlier stayed the proceedings against Pratapgarhi on January 21, issuing a notice to the Gujarat government and the complainant. The Congress leader had challenged the Gujarat High Court&#8217;s January 17 order, which dismissed his plea to quash the FIR on the grounds that the investigation was still at an early stage.<\/p>\n<p>Pratapgarhi, who serves as the chairman of the Congress&#8217; minority cell, had been booked under Sections 196 and 197 of the BNS, among others, for allegedly sharing a provocative song. The 46-second video posted on X featured flower petals being showered on Pratapgarhi as he walked while a song played in the background. The FIR claimed the lyrics incited unrest and harmed national unity, while Pratapgarhi argued that the poem conveyed a message of love and non-violence.<\/p>\n<p>The prosecution opposed his plea, contending that the poem&#8217;s words incited rebellion against the government. The Gujarat High Court had earlier ruled that the social response to the post indicated serious repercussions, disturbing communal harmony. However, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Pratapgarhi, reaffirming that freedom of speech must be protected in a democratic society.<\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>IMRAN PRATAPGADHI [APPELLANT]\u00a0 Vs.\u00a0 STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR. [RESPONDENTS] (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1545 OF 2025) (2JB, Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan JJ., delivered by ABHAY S. OKA, J.) \u00a0 The Supreme Court of India has quashed an FIR filed against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi by the Gujarat police for posting a poem on social [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2972,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2970","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-judgement"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2970","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2970"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2970\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2974,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2970\/revisions\/2974"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2972"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2970"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2970"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2970"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}