Allahabad High Court Refuses Relief To Man Accused Of Making Hate Speech Against UP CM Yogi Adityanath, Dhirendra Shastri

The Allahabad High Court last week refused to quash an FIR lodged against a Bhim Army leader who has been accused of making hate speech against the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath and Bageshwar Baba, Dhirendra Shastri.The Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha (now serving as the Chief Justice of the Chhattisgarh High Court) and Justice Narendra Kumar Johari also declined to stay the arrest of the petitioner Deepak as it noted that prima facie, a case was made out against him.The Court was essentially dealing with the writ plea filed by accused Deepak who had moved the Court seeking to quash the FIR lodged against him under Section 505 (2) of IPC with a further prayer to stay the arrest of the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned FIR. The said FIR was lodged by one Vijay Kumar Gautam alleging that the petitioner made hate speech on Facebook against the abovenamed persons. The petitioner's counsel argued that he had been falsely implicated in the case with malafide intention and that no offence was made out against him.On the other hand, the AGA, for the state argued that the impugned FIR discloses a cognizable offence against the petitioner, hence, the instant writ petition is liable to be dismissed.Having heard the counsels for both parties, the Court observed that it was apparent that the petitioner had made a derogatory and disrespectful comment against Chief Minister Adityanath as well as Bageshwar Baba Dhirendra Shastri. "Moreover, from the allegations made in the F.I.R. as a subject matter of investigation and at this stage it cannot be said that no offence, whatsoever is made out against the petitioner", the Court added.The Court also noted that in view of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited vs. State of Maharashtra: AIR 2021 SC 1918, and on perusal of the impugned FIR and material on record, it transpires that, prima facie, a case is made out against the petitioner. In view of this, further noting that the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners relate to disputed questions of facts, which cannot be adjudicated upon by the Court in the jurisdiction of under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court dismissed the plea.Case title - Deepak vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. And Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2077 of 2023]Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 109Click Here To Read/Downlaod Order

Allahabad High Court Refuses Relief To Man Accused Of Making Hate Speech Against UP CM Yogi Adityanath, Dhirendra Shastri

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags