Can Multiple FIRs Arise Out Of Single Speech? Supreme Court Asks In Sharjeel Imam's Plea

While considering the plea by former JNU student Sharjeel Imam to club multiple FIRs against him, the Supreme Court today (April 29) pondered on whether multiple cases can arise out of a single speech published online. The bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar was hearing the plea by Sharjeel Imam seeking the clubbing FIRs for the alleged offences of sedition and under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) registered in the states of U.P., Assam, Manipur, and Arunachal Pradesh.During the hearing, the CJI inquired, since the FIRs are arising out of one speech, would it not amount to double jeopardy if Imam gets convicted in the trials occurring in multiple states. Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the State of Delhi, however, argued that the offences constituted are different. "Instigating a mob in Bihar, instigating a mob in UP, instigating a mob in Delhi- they are different offences". The CJI reverted, " The speech is one, it's not separate, so there will be one offence." The ASG stressed further that since different communities in different states were affected, there would be multiple offences involved. He explained : "But if different persons are instigated separately....the offences against the state may be one, but against the society will be different." To which the CJI replied that such an argument would hold ground if the FIRs were arising out of multiple speeches, which is not the present case. He said : "If there was a different speech, you may be right, here the speech is the same."ASG also clarified that the question of double jeopardy would only arise at a later stage in case there is a conviction in the trials. The CJI then suggested that trials in other states may be stayed till the time the trial in the Delhi Court is complete. He said , "Mr Raju if you permit, we can stay the trial in other states till the Delhi Trial is complete." ASG replied that he was not appearing for other states. Senior Advocate Sidharth Dave, appearing for Imam informed the bench that the the petitioner is getting summons from those courts even as he faces trial in the Delhi Court. He urged the need to transfer all the pending trials to Delhi. The ASG submitted that the petitioner has made two different speeches at different places. Dave stressed that it would be impractical for the petitioner to appear across various states for a trial arising from a single speech. "Now they are asking me to come to Assam, UP, Manipur - now I cannot be dragged across the country for one speech that I gave." "Imagine my lords, one speech- there can be 500 prosecutions across India, so you would be prosecuted 500 times and undergo custody 500 times? And they will all be separate offences?" Dave asked.ASG interjected, "Look at the kind of speeches he has given, he says separate Assam from India!" Dave responded that whatever the case may be, the rule of law has to be followed. He expressed, "I may have given the worst of the speeches, but I have the right to rule of law has to be applied, which Mr Raju cannot take away." The CJI pondered on the issue whether the incident amounts to multiple offences, he explained that since Imam's speech was recorded and available on YouTube, it could have been heard by people across India, but the fact remains that the FIRs filed are from this single speech though the impact of it may vary. "The speech was recorded, so the speech can be heard across India, but the offence is one, the impact thereof will be other....otherwise it will be difficult" ASG replied that in the next hearing, he will be submitting various precedents that show that multiple offences are made out in the present case. The bench agreed to re-list the matter after two weeks to consider the issue. In August 2024, the Court sought responses from the four state governments on whether they had any objection to transferring the trial to the Delhi Court and the chargesheets, if any, filed elsewhere are transferred to the Court in seisin of the matter at Delhi. The Court was also informed that investigations concerning FIR in Assam and Manipur were complete, and Imam was due for default bail in the Assam matter. Imam has mainly sought that the various FIRs be clubbed and transferred to a Delhi Court for trial. On January 28, 2020, the Delhi Police arrested him under UAPA concerning his speeches delivered at the Jamia Millia Islamia University and the Aligarh Muslim University and he has been under custody ever since.Case Details : SHARJEEL IMAM Versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. Diary No. 4730-2020

Can Multiple FIRs Arise Out Of Single Speech? Supreme Court Asks In Sharjeel Imam's Plea

Anmol Kaur Bawa

Tags