He tweeted incorrect facts without verifying; it could breach peace: Allahabad HC denies relief to scribe

The Allahabad High Court at Lucknow Bench recently dismissed a plea moved by a scribe to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him over his social media post.

The bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed observed, "The allegation for spreading incorrect facts, without verifying and sharing the same through Twitter handles, has also been levelled against the applicant. On account of sharing of incorrect facts on Twitter handles, there was a chance of violation of public peace and tranquillity in the Society".

The judge stressed that it appeared that the intention of the accused was just to defame the image of the present Government in the State and to create communal terror which is direct attack to disturb the peace and harmony of the State.

"No one can be given the licence to disturb the peace ad tranquillity in the society, even though the applicant was not given authority under the law to do all such type of act for which he has no authority," the judge said.

Therefore, while stating that it seemed that the chargesheet against the accused had been filed after due investigation and the Magistrate had taken cognizance of the same, court held that a cognizable offence was made out against the accused.

Through the present plea, applicant scribe Manish Kumar Pandey had challenged the chargesheet and criminal proceedings launched against him in pursuance of an FIR registered with the Hazratganj police station on August 21, 2020, pertaining to a viral post on social media.

Initially, a case under Sections 419, 420, 465, 469, 471, 153-A, 153-B, 505 (1) (b), 505 (2) I.P.C. and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act was registered against unknown persons, and later, Kumar's name was included in the list of accused.

Allegations against Kumar were that he made a false post on his Twitter handle which stated that BJP MLA Dev Mani Dwivedi was demanding from the additional chief secretary, home the information of criminal cases registered against various political persons. With the Tweet, one image on MLA's forged letter pad was attached. The MLA had denied issuing any such letter.

The allegations were that the Blank Letter Pad of the MLA was obtained to gain undue advantage and with the intention to disturb the peace and harmony of the State.

Moving the present plea to quash the case against Kumar, his counsel said that he is a journalist and owing to his profession, he shares multiple social media posts.

Counsel submitted that Kumar had received a copy of the said letter from a reputed media person working as Editor/State Head of a Regional News Channel named India News U.P./U.K.

The letter shared by the applicant on his Twitter was purely in form of a news report and was not shared with any intention to spread communal terror or to defame the image of the present Government, Kumar's counsel contended.

On the other hand, the state counsel opposed the plea while stating that though Kumar claimed to be a journalist, he did not annexe any relevant document or licence issued to him regarding his profession by any authority.

The Additional Advocate General argued that Kumar's act was with the intention to defame the image of the ruling party in the State.

"The Government is working in the State for the peace and harmony of the people and for overall development in the State. The said action of the applicant is a crime against the State and does not deserve any sympathy by this Court", AAG submitted.

The single judge bench said that after perusal of the materials on record and looking into the facts of the case, it could not be stated that no offence had been made out against the accused.

"Every person including the present applicant has the freedom of speech and the right to express his thoughts and ideas in general public as guaranteed by the Constitution of India, but such freedom should not be used in such a way that it would result in affecting the peace and tranquillity in the society," court said.

Therefore, while stating that the power of the high court under Section 482 CrPC is very wide but should be exercised very cautiously to do real and substantial justice for which the court alone exists, the single judge bench dismissed the present plea.

Case Title: Manish Kumar Pandey v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others