Read Time: 07 minutes

The Allahabad High court on Tuesday refused to quash the First Information Report (FIR), lodged against alleged circulation of a video in which obscene and insulting statements were made against Hindus by an anonymous Maulana. Allegedly, the Maulana had commented that Hazrat Adam is the father of Hindus.

Refusing petitioners’ claim that allegations against them were fake and no such video had ever been circulated, the division bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Ajai Tyagi noted,

“From the facts brought on record, we find that prima facie a cognizable offence is disclosed in the first information report and in view of the law settled, prayer for its quashment cannot be allowed. The prayer made in that regard in the petition is thus declined.”

Importantly, stressing that whether or not such viral video contains any offending material is required to be examined by the investigating agencies, Court held that “the Court won't be justified in entertaining the challenge to the first information report only on factual issues about the video not containing such substance.”

As per the First Information Report (FIR), a case was registered against several persons, including the instant petitioner, Shakil Khan, on basis of a complaint by one Mahesh Pandey.

Pandey had alleged that while browsing Facebook on October 23, 201, he had landed on a video in which obscene and insulting statements were being made by one Maulana against the people of the Hindu community.

As per Pandey, in the said viral video, Maulana had even commented that ‘Hazrat Adam is the father of Hindus’. Pandey had alleged that comments like this were hurtful to his other Hindus' sentiments.

Allegedly, the video was of one event that had taken place a few days back in Raipur village, Chitrakoot, Uttar Pradesh which was organized by one Jabir Khan and the video of the same was uploaded on October 5.

As per Pandey’s complaint, the same was done with an intention to hurt the sentiments of Hindus and to humiliate them. The FIR also mentions that as an effect of this video, there was resentment among the Hindus.

Pursuant to this, a case was registered against the accused persons including Khan under Sections 295-A, 505(2) IPC & Section 66 Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. Many others, who were allegedly involved in that event had also been named in that FIR.

In his instant criminal writ petition, Khan had argued that allegations were absolutely fake and that in fact no such video had been circulated, which had offended the feelings of members of a particular community.

However, the Additional Government Advocate had challenged his submissions stating that a chargesheet had already been filed against one Sabbir Khan and the investigation is pending in the case against Shaquil Khan, and another person with a similar name (Shaquil) is said to have been exonerated.

Taking note of these facts and submissions, the court refused to quash the FIR at this stage, however, pointing out that as all the offences alleged in the police report provide for the punishment of less than seven years, court directed the police authorities to keep in mind the provisions of Section 41-A Cr. P.C while conducting an investigation in the matter.

Case Title: Shakil Khan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others