Freedom of expression should be exercised within four walls of Constitution: Bombay HC

The Bombay high court (HC) while observing that criticism of persons holding public posts has become rampant on social media, said while such persons should face

The Bombay high court (HC) while observing that criticism of persons holding public posts has become rampant on social media, said while such persons should face and bear it, the citizens were required to exercise restraint to an extent so that the dignity of the post was not abused and to ensure there is no ‘unfair’ criticism beyond the rights provided under the Constitution. The HC made the observations while hearing the plea of a Nagpur resident seeking to quash a first information report (FIR) against him for posting abusive tweets against Maharashtra chief minister Uddhav Thackeray and his son Aaditya Thackeray on Twitter on June 1 and 30.

HT Image

A division bench of justice SS Shinde and justice MS Karnik, while hearing the petition by Sameet Thakkar, 32, was informed by advocate Abhinav Chandrachud that the petition sought that the FIR against Thakkar be quashed and set aside as well. Thakkar also sought interim protection from arrest.

A complaint was registered against Thakkar at VP Marg Police station on July 2 by advocate Dharmendra Mishra, a legal consultant for the Shiv Sena, for posting abusive and offensive tweets on June 1 and 30 against the Thackeray duo. Thakkar was booked under sections 292 (obscene acts or words in public), 500 (defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and provisions of the Information Technology Act.

While making light of the complaint, Chandrachud submitted that persons holding public posts should let go of such comments at times and referred to former Supreme Court judge justice VR Krishna Iyer’s observation: “The dogs may bark but the caravan will pass.” He added that the SC had also observed that those who occupy positions of power should have ‘thick skin’ while reacting to criticism. In light of this, he said the ‘obscenity’ charge against his client was excessive.

Advocate JP Yagnik, for the state, assured the court that Thakkar would not be arrested if he cooperated with the investigation and attended the police station as and when called for questioning.

After hearing the submissions, the court while addressing Chandrachud said, “Sometimes the tweets are abusive. The rights of your client cannot violate someone else’s constitutional rights. Responsible citizens should know they have rights, but to what extent.”

Justice Shinde said, “Now it has become easy to criticise through social media posts. People think they can get publicity if they post something against the PM or CM. Perhaps, they think that is the easiest way to get publicity. You know now even the judiciary is not an exception.” He further added that as it was a known fact that the rights to freedom of speech and expression were not absolute, citizens should refrain and ensure that someone else’s rights are not violated because of their abusive language.

The bench said that democracy allows citizens to be free, and hence there will be comments, but the comments have to be within the four walls of rights under the Constitution.

After Chandrachud assured the court that his client would abide by the court’s observations, Thakkar was directed to appear before the investigating officer on Monday (October 5) and posted the matter for hearing on October 8.