THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IMPOSED FINE ON MAHARASHTRA FOR UNJUSTIFIED ARREST OF CONGRESSMAN.
Last Updated on March 2, 2023 by Administrator
Written By – Unnati
ISSUE: The Bombay High Court recently said that the law should not be used to silence dissent and intimidate people from expressing their thoughts. The court dismissed a lawsuit against a congress member who had made a social media post criticising a BJP leader.
FACTS: Sandeep Arjun Kudale, a congressman, ran against BJP leader and minister Chandrakant Patil. Two first information reports (FIRS) were filed against Kudale for allegedly posting a video clip on social media in which he made disrespectful statements towards minister Patil. Kudale shared the video to criticise Patil for allegedly making offensive remarks about social revolutionaries Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, Mahatma Jyotiba Phule, and Karmaveer Bhaurao Patil. He was then charged with violating Sections 153A of the IPC.
REASONING: The Court ruled that Section 153A of the Indian Criminal Code (IPC) (promoting hatred between different communities on various grounds) should not be used to muzzle criticism. The high court bench of justices Revati Mohite Dere and PK Chavan stated that “Section 153A cannot be used to prevent anyone from expressing their views/opinions/dissent, so long as Article 19(2) (reasonable restrictions on freedom of expression) is not infringed,” the Court stated. The panel further fined the State government 25,000 for the “unjustified arrest” of petitioner Sandeep Kudale. After reviewing the submitted footage, the Court determined that there was no evidence of an offence against Kudale.The Court further found that Kudale had merely expressed his dissent by denouncing what the minister had said. The Court also concluded that Kudale’s language and statements were at best repulsive, but not repulsive enough to warrant the filing of a FIR, let alone his detention.
CONCLUSION: As a result, the Court invalidated both FIRs and ordered the State government to pay Kudale 25,000 in fees for his unlawful arrest.The expenditures were directed to be recovered from the salaries of the police officers in charge of FIR registration. Kudale was represented by attorneys Subodh Desai and Lokesh Zade. The State was represented by Advocate General Birendra Saraf and Chief Public Prosecutor Aruna Pai.
