‘Unsaid Words in WhatsApp Message Can Be Communal’: Allahabad HC

The division bench of Justices J.J. Munir and Pramod Kumar Srivastava dismissed a writ petition filed by one Afaq Ahmad, who sought quashing of an FIR registered against him under Sections 299 and 353(3) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, for allegedly circulating an “inflammatory” WhatsApp message following his brother’s arrest in a religious conversion case in Bijnor district.

The FIR, lodged by Sub-Inspector Prashant Singh of Chandpur Police Station, alleged that Ahmad had sent messages through WhatsApp that were “maliciously intended to disturb communal harmony and outrage religious feelings of a class of citizens". The messages were reportedly deleted automatically by a timer in the app, but screenshots of them were recovered by the police from a local resident.

According to the complaint, Ahmad’s brother, Arif, had been arrested earlier under provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The prosecution alleged that Ahmad’s social media posts, made after the arrest, were aimed at instigating communal disharmony. Ahmad, however, argued that his posts merely expressed resentment at his brother’s arrest and the stigma it had caused to his family.

His counsel, Advocate Syed Shahnawaz Shah, contended that the WhatsApp message contained no inflammatory words or religious references and instead demonstrated the petitioner’s faith in the judicial process. He argued that the message only protested against the police action and the false narrative built around his brother’s case, and could not possibly be construed as promoting hatred or ill-will between communities. The counsel further pointed out that Arif had already been granted bail by the trial court.

Rejecting these arguments, the High Court said that even though the words in the message did not explicitly refer to religion, “they definitely convey an underlying and subtle message that his brother has been targeted in a false case because of his belonging to a particular religious community".

The judges observed that such “unsaid words” could prima facie outrage religious feelings of a community, making its members believe they were being targeted for their faith.

The bench added that, even if one were to assume that the message did not directly outrage religious feelings, it “is certainly a message which, by its unsaid words, is likely to create or promote feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between religious communities".

It noted that the act may not attract Section 353(3) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita but would still fall within the ambit of Section 353(2), which penalises acts promoting enmity between communities.

Emphasising that the matter required further investigation, court refused to interfere at the preliminary stage or quash the FIR.

“This is a matter which requires investigation and cannot be scuttled at an incipient stage, foreclosing a probe that must be carried to its logical conclusion,” the bench said.

Case Title: Afaq Ahmad vs. State of U.P. and others

Order Date: September 26, 2025

Bench: Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava