Provocative social media posts, potentially inciting communal and political tension: FIR can not be quashed
Allahabad High Court Upholds FIR Against Neha Singh Rathore; Dismisses Petition Challenging Charges. Court emphasizes reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a), directs petitioner to cooperate with investigation
The Allahabad High Court, in a significant judgment dated September 19, 2025, upheld the First Information Report (FIR) lodged against Neha Singh Rathore, a social activist and singer, for her alleged derogatory social media posts targeting the Prime Minister and the BJP Government. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, dismissed the petition filed by Rathore seeking quashing of the FIR and directed her to cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
The court reiterated that while Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution guarantees the freedom of speech and expression, it is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) to maintain public order, decency, morality, and national security. The FIR, lodged under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the IT Act, 2008, was found to disclose cognizable offences, warranting an investigation.
The petitioner had contended that her posts, albeit viral, did not incite any class or community against another nor did they threaten national sovereignty or integrity. Rathore's counsel argued that her rights under Article 19(1)(a) were being infringed upon, citing precedents where creative expressions were protected. However, the court found the timing and content of her tweets, especially those coinciding with sensitive national events, to be provocative and potentially disruptive to public harmony.
The judgment outlined that the fundamental right to freedom of speech is not absolute and emphasized the necessity of reasonable restrictions, especially when speech could incite violence or disrupt national unity. The court drew parallels with similar cases where derogatory remarks against constitutional authorities were not shielded under free speech.
The court also referenced judgments from the Supreme Court, including the guidelines from the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, which delineates circumstances under which FIRs can be quashed. In Rathore's case, none of these guidelines were applicable as the FIR disclosed prima facie cognizable offences.
The court concluded that the investigation should proceed uninfluenced by the observations made in the judgment, ensuring it is conducted fairly and impartially. Rathore was instructed to appear before the investigating officer on September 26, 2025, to assist with the investigation process.
Bottom Line:
Fundamental Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) for preserving public order, decency, morality, and national security.
Statutory provision(s): Article 19(1)(a), Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 196, 197, IT Act, 2008 Section 69A
