Freedom of speech does not entitle a person to make derogatory remarks/posts against any community or gender
“Freedom of speech does not entitle a person to make derogatory remarks/posts against any community or gender“, aside the Punjab & Haryana High Court while dismissing a petition for grant of regular bail to the Petitioner under Sections 153-A, 295-A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Brief Background of the Case
The brief facts relevant to the present case are that the FIR was lodged on the complaint made by one Savita Kajal and Kuldeep Bhukkal wherein it has been alleged that Savita Kajal uploaded a post of Baba Saheb Bhimrao Ambedkar on her Facebook ID and VijenderSarsawa(petitioner herein) made insulting and objectionable comments on the post to create disharmony in the society.
It is further the allegation that petitioner uses filthy language and makes objectionable comments against females belonging to Scheduled Castes. It is also the allegation that insulting comments have been made by the petitioner against Muslim women.
A petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.485 dated 13.08.2020 under Sections 153-A, 295-A and 505 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 registered at Police Station City Hansi, District Hisar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the ingredients of Section 153 A, 295-A and 505 are not made out in the present case and he has been in custody since 24.09.2020.
Earlier, the counsel for the petitioner had submitted before the Court that the complainant is a chronic litigant and is in the habit of filing false and frivolous complaints with ulterior motive to extort money from innocent persons.
It was further submitted that even perusal of the messages, which the Petitioner allegedly texted on Facebook “were in fact messages received by him and forwarded without any motive much less to hurt the feeling of the complainant or the other citizens of the country.”
Observation and order of the Court
The Court, in its order, noted that,
A bare perusal of the screen shots of the said posts prima facie reveals that the posts are not only derogatory in nature but are made against particular communities. In fact, the petitioner along with the petition has appended as Annexure P-2 just one of the posts whereas a number of posts as made by the petitioner have been attached with the status report. The Court is refraining itself from commenting on the nature of the posts made by the petitioner herein at this stage. Suffice it to say that freedom of speech does not entitle a person to make derogatory remarks/posts against any community or gender.
In view of the above, Court did not find it fit to grant of regular bail. The same is hence, dismissed. It is, however, made clear that any observation made herein shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Case Name: Vijender Kumar v. State Of Haryana
Coram: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
[Freedom of speech does not entitle a person to make derogatory remarks/posts against any community or gender]