Editors Pick

Gujarat HC quashes FIR against Hardik Patel regarding Section 153A, 505(2) and 506 ; Directs investigation on Sedition [Read Judgment]

Live Law News Network
28 Oct 2015 4:08 PM GMT
Gujarat HC quashes FIR against Hardik Patel regarding Section 153A, 505(2) and 506 ; Directs investigation on Sedition [Read Judgment]
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

Gujarat High Court Yesterday quashed the First Information Report against Patidar Anamat Andolan Samiti (PAAS) convener Hardik Patel so far as it relates the offences under Section 153A, 505(2) and 506. The Court also directed the police to proceed with the investigation on allegation of Sedition [S.124A] since a prima facie Case is made out against him.

“It is the fundamental right of every citizen to have his own political theories and ideas and to propagate them and work for their  establishment so long as he does not seek to do so by force and violence  or contravene any provision of law. The demand for reservation for the  members of the Patidar Patel community by itself is not an offence. It is  open to the members of the Patidar Patel community to seek reservation,  if available in law or the State Government, by way of a policy decision,  deems   fit   to   provide.   It   is   also   open   to   demand   for   reservation   by  peaceful means, ceaselessly fighting public opinion that might be against  them and opposing those who desired the continuance of the existing  order   of   the   society   and   the   Government.   What  is   not   permissible   in  order to attain such object is any act which have the effect of bringing or  which   attempt   to   bring   into   hatredness   or   contempt   or   excites   or  attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by  law”. Justice J.B.Pardiwala said in his Judgment

He rejected the contention that the advice alleged to have been given by  Patel was   to kill 4 to 5 police officers had nothing to do so far as the Government  is concerned. Court also rejected the contention that  that a police force at  best could be termed as one of the agencies of the State Government,  and any attack of any nature on the police force would not amount to  subverting the Government established by law.

“Many innocent persons lost their lives which  included a police officer. Many Police Stations, Public buses, etc. were  set on fire. Extensive damage  was caused to the Government properties.  In this background, it would be appropriate to infer at this primary stage  from the text and tenor of the statement or the words spoken by the  applicant that the same was intended and it did bring the Government in  the   contempt   with   the   likelihood   of   eruption   of   violence   and   public  disorder. In terms of the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in  the case of Kedar Nath Singh , the applicant has yet to undergo  the trial, if the chargesheet is filed. The fact of the matter is that the  chargesheet has not been filed till this date, and the investigation is still  in progress. It may not be appropriate to dilate on the merit of this case  so far as Section 124A is concerned”, said the Court

As far as S.153A is concerned, the Court held as follows;

“although it could be said that the  members of the Patidar Patel community have been provoked, but such  provocation has nothing to do with any other religion, race or linguistic  or regional group or community. The police force of the State cannot be  brought within the purview of the term "community".

Read the Judgment here.

Next Story