Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

Delhi Court dismisses complaint filed by Advocate GS Mani against Kerala MLA KT Jaleel seeking registration of FIR over his remarks on Jammu & Kashmir being "Indian Occupied Territory".

Jaleel had pointed out that the Indian occupied J&K in which people living are not happy & the "Pakistan Occupied Jammu Kashmir" is Azad Kashmir means independence territory.

Advocate GS Mani had filed a complaint against K.T. Jaleel, MLA, Kerala Legislative Assembly, alleging that Jaleel through his tweet has committed various offences under IPC and the same needs to be investigated upon and thus sought registration of FIR against the accused.

Jaleel in his tweet, stated that “the territory of Jammu Kashmir as Indian Occupied Jammu Kashmir in which people living are not happy & the territory of Pakistan Occupied Jammu Kashmir as Azad Kashmir which mean independence territory.”

Mani had sought registration of FIR against Jaleel as his tweet is anti-national, seditions and is likely to cause/promote enmity between different religions, groups, namely Hindu and Muslims. It was also submitted that the tweet is likely to cause disharmony and feeling of hatred/ill-will and may cause riots between different religious groups.

It may be noted that several other FIRs over the same tweet have already been registered.

Over the registration of another FIR the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Harjeet Singh Jaspal observed that since an FIR has already been registered qua the very same tweet of the accused, a second or a subsequent FIR is not permissible as per law.

Thereafter, considering the question as to whether making a statement that the people of Kashmir are not happy or that part of Kashmir which is under occupation of Pakistan is ‘Azad’, amounts to sedition, the Court referred to the judgment I'm the case of SG Vombatker Vs. Union of India. Wherein, the apex court had noted, " the individual liberties/civil liberties need to be balanced with sovereignty of the State, in view of the several instances, in the recent past where the law was misused...the Centre and the State will desist from registering any FIR u/s 124 A."

The Court while dealing with the tweet, noted that "Social set up, secular thread and fraternity in democratic Indian background cannot be assumed to be that feeble that it would break or get bruised on random statements of selfish politicians and I can proudly say the same about national integration as well."

The Court, referring to the judgment in the case of M.F. Hussain Vs. Raj Kumar Pandey said that the Constitution helps to cultivate the "virtue of tolerance". The freedom of speech is the matrix, the indispensable condition of nearly every other form of freedom.

In view of the above, the Court opined that the alleged statement “the people of Kashmir are not happy” etc. can be called the opinion of the author (though unsupported by any authority or survey etc. and is arguably incorrect) and is thus protected by the fundamental freedom of article 19."

Additionally, the Court also noted that "Both Hindus and Muslims and all citizens of all religions, idolize the idea of the Kashmir being an unalienable part of the territory of India and the idea of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir being called “Azad Kashmir” will equally anguish and disgust both the communities or rather every Indian of every community."

The Court also referred to the Judgment of US Supreme Court in the case of Texas Vs. Johnson, wherein on a controversial question of flag burning, the US top court through majority verdict held that free speech ought to be protected, though it may be against the popular beliefs of the society or may even be offensive to some. "The matter at hand is no different," ACMM Jaspal added.

Case Title: G.S. Mani Vs. Commissioner of Police Delhi & Ors.