Upholding the liberty of speech and proper to dissent, the Supreme Court has dominated that each citizen of India has the precise to criticise any choice of the State. The SC was listening to a plea filed by a professor who was booked for his WhatsApp standing criticising the abrogation of Article 370. The apex court docket additionally quashed the FIR registered towards the professor.
“Describing the day the abrogation happened as a ‘Black Day’ is an expression of protest and anguish. If every criticism or protest of the actions of the State is to be held as an offence under Section 153-A, democracy, which is an essential feature of the Constitution of India, will not survive,” stated the highest court docket.
What Is The Case?
According to PTI, the Maharashtra Police had registered an FIR at Hatkanangale police station towards Hajam over his WhatsApp standing through which he stated, “August 5-Black Day Jammu & Kashmir” and “14th August-Happy Independence Day Pakistan”. The professor additionally used a photograph of the moon whereas wishing Pakistan. Overturning a Bombay High Court order upholding the FIR registered within the case, the Supreme Court dismissed the costs filed beneath Section 153A (promotion of communal disharmony) of the Indian Penal Code towards Professor Javed Ahmed Hajam.Â
‘Wishing Pakistan Gesture Of Goodwill’
On Hajam wishing Pakistan, the highest court docket stated each citizen has the precise to increase good needs to the residents of different nations on their respective independence days. The apex court docket noticed that if a citizen of India extends good needs to the residents of Pakistan on 14th August then there may be nothing mistaken with it and it is a gesture of goodwill.
“The Constitution of India, under Article 19(1)(a), guarantees freedom of speech and expression. Under the said guarantee, every citizen has the right to offer criticism of the action of abrogation of Article 370 or, for that matter, every decision of the State. He has the right to say he is unhappy with any decision of the State,” stated a bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan.
‘Right To Dissent With Reasonable Restriction’
The apex court docket stated the precise to dissent in a legit and lawful method is an integral a part of the rights assured beneath Article 19(1)(a). “Every individual must respect the right of others to dissent. An opportunity to peacefully protest against the decisions of the Government is an essential part of democracy….The right to dissent in a lawful manner must be treated as a part of the right to lead a dignified and meaningful life guaranteed by Article 21,” it stated.
However, the bench maintained that the protest or dissent should be inside 4 corners of the modes permissible in a democratic set-up and added it’s topic to cheap restrictions imposed in accordance with clause (2) of Article 19.
The apex court docket additionally famous that the time has come to enlighten and educate police equipment on the idea of freedom of speech and expression assured by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and the extent of cheap restraint on their free speech and expression.
