The Karnataka High Court has held that posting a statement as a WhatsApp status does not constitute “publication or circulation” on a public forum so as to amount to a statement which creates or promotes enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes under Section 505(2) IPC.

In doing so the court quashed an FIR under Section 505(2) IPC against a man accused of posting a WhatsApp status which allegedly created “enmity between communities” following the Lok Sabha election result announcement in 2024.

Section 505(2) of the IPC (corresponding to Section 353(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) penalizes a person for publishing or circulating statements intended to create enmity, hatred, or ill-will between different communities on the grounds of religions, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community or any other ground.

Justice Rajesh Rai K held that the ingredients of the offence under Section 505(2) IPC— publication or circulation of statements with an intent to incite violence or promote enmity—were absent.

“A careful reading of the said WhatsApp status does not disclose any semblance of intention or motive on the part of the petitioner to cause disorder or incite people to violence so as to attract the ingredients of Section 505(2) of IPC. Moreover, the same was posted in WhatsApp status, which is neither a social media platform nor any public forum and it is accessible normally to people who are in his contact list. As such, the primary ingredients for the offence under Section 505(2) IPC i.e., publication or circulation of the of statement are absent,” Justice Rajesh Rai K said.

Placing reliance on the Supreme Court ruling in Bilal Ahmed Kaloo vs. State of A.P. (1997), the Court held, “There is no publication or circulation of the statements by the petitioner and since the same is posted in the WhatsApp status, the ingredients of Section of 505(2) IPC does not attract on the face of the complaint averments. Hence, continuation of proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No.38/2024 is nothing but abuse of process of law.”

Accordingly, the High Court quashed the FIR registered by the second respondent.

Background

The case arose out of a complaint lodged on June 7, 2024, by the second respondent, a member of Indian National Congress party. He submitted that the petitioner, on June 5, 2024— a day after the general election results were announced— had uploaded a WhatsApp status which allegedly said that the results show the victory of the ruling party and defeat of the people belonging to a particular community. The statement allegedly created enmity between the communities. Later, an FIR was registered at the Subramanya Police Station in Dakshina Kannada under Section 505(2).

The petitioner, subsequently, filed a criminal petition before the High Court, seeking to quash the FIR filed against him. He contended that the complainant was not an aggrieved party and the complaint was lodged only for political gain. He further argued that the WhatsApp status did not cause disorder or incite violence, and that the complaint failed to disclose mens rea on part of the petitioner to incite violence.

On the other hand, the High Court Government Pleader opposed the plea, stating that the complaint clearly discloses the ingredients of Section 505(2) offence and that the investigation was underway.

CASE: VENKAPPA GOWDA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5909 OF 2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order