Synopsis: Sameet Thakkar, who was booked for criticising Maharashtra CM Uddhav Thackeray, was granted protection from arrest by the Bombay High Court.
Sameet Thakkar, accused of tweeting derogatory statements against Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, has been granted protection from arrest by the Bombay High Court.
A petition filed by Thakkar was heard by the division bench of Justice S S Shinde and Justice M S Karnik, seeking orders to quash and set aside a FIR filed against him at the V P Marg police station over his tweets against the Minister, Aaditya Thackeray and his son, CM Uddhav Thackeray.
Advocate on behalf of the petitioner, Abhinav Chandrachud, argued that it is a citizen’s constitutional right to criticise a public office. The counsel said that obscenity meant only sexual obscenity or pornography under section 292 of the IPC and that mere abusive language did not amount to obscenity, citing the remark by Justice VR Krishna Iyer that trifling and venial offences should be overlooked by the courts.
Besides that, the counsel argued that the complaint was filed by a private individual and not by the Chief Minister, who was defamed under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC for the case against Thakkar.
Additional Public Prosecutor JP Yagnik appeared for the state and claimed that under section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the police had given a notice to Thakkar, but he had not yet appeared before them to record his statement.
The bench said after considering the submission from both parties that the integrity of the office is not respected by the persons holding public offices and it is preserved by the people, the Court said that the petitioner’s interests can not compromise. It is acknowledged that civil rights are not absolute. If criticism is legitimate, then the person who holds public office should have the opportunity to consider it. But it can’t be unreasonable and abusive to criticise.
The Court, however, ordered Sameet Thakkar to appear before the police to record his statement pursuant to Section 161 of the CrPC.
Furthermore, the court ordered the Additional Public Prosecutor not to arrest Thakkar because the notice, which does not contemplate arrest, was given under section 41-A of the CrPC.
The case is set for further hearing on October 8.