The supreme court made an observation while quashing a professor’s criminal complaint under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code for his criticism of the repeal of Article 370 over WhatsApp.
The Supreme Court made a critical observation on Thursday, March 7, while dismissing a criminal case against a professor for his WhatsApp status criticizing the repeal of Article 370. The court noted that law enforcement needs to be educated on the fundamental right to free speech and expression guaranteed by the Constitution, as well as the reasonableness of restrictions on that right.
The Court stated : “Now, the time has come to enlighten and educate our police machinery on the concept of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and the extent of reasonable restraint on their free speech and expression. They must be sensitised about the democratic values enshrined in our Constitution.”
Judges Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan’s bench issued a verdict that included this comment as part of a larger decision that emphasized people’ inherent freedom to voice disagreement and criticism, especially on issues of public concern. This decision was made in relation to a case involving Professor Javed Ahmed Hajam, who was accused of violating the Indian Penal Code’s Section 153A (promotion of communal disharmony) for his WhatsApp status updates on the repeal of Article 370.
“Under the said guarantee, every citizen has the right to offer criticism of the action of abrogation of Article 370 and the change of status of Jammu and Kashmir or, for that matter, every decision of the State. He has the right to say he is unhappy with any decision of the State…Describing the day the abrogation happened as a ‘Black Day’ is an expression of protest and anguish…This is an expression of his individual view and his reaction to the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution of the Constitution of India. It does not reflect any intention to do something which is prohibited under Section 153-A. At best, it is a protest, which is a part of his freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a).”
Significantly, the court also said, “If every criticism or protest of the actions of the State is to be held as an offence under Section 153-A, democracy, which is an essential feature of the Constitution of India, will not survive.”
Additionally, the justices emphasized that sensible people who comprehend democratic norms should be the ones to assess voices of opposition rather than those with “weak minds.” Regarding the professor’s second letter on Pakistan’s Independence Day, the bench emphasized that people have the freedom to wish others well without it being interpreted as encouraging discord. It further warned against attributing any motive to the appellant only because he follows a certain faith.
Case Title : Javed Ahmad Hajam v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Good content