New Delhi, Feb 10 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Monday raised concerns over an FIR registered by the Gujarat Police against Congress Rajya Sabha MP Imran Pratapgarhi for a poem posted on social media, questioning whether the authorities had understood the true meaning of the poem.
A bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, while hearing Pratapgarhi’s petition challenging the Gujarat High Court’s refusal to quash the FIR, noted that the police appeared to have misinterpreted the poem.
"Please see the poem. The (High) Court has not appreciated the meaning of the poem. It's ultimately a poem," Justice Oka observed while addressing Advocate Swati Ghildiyal, representing the State.
Emphasizing the non-violent message of the poem, Justice Oka remarked, "It is not against any religion. This poem indirectly says even if somebody indulges in violence, we will not indulge in violence. That's the message that the poem gives. It is not against any particular community."
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Pratapgarhi, asserted, "The judge has done violence to the law. That is my worry."
The bench granted a three-week adjournment at the request of the State’s counsel. Justice Oka directed the counsel to "apply your mind to the poem. After all, creativity is also important."
Earlier, the Court had granted interim relief to Pratapgarhi, staying further proceedings based on the FIR.
The case pertains to an Instagram post featuring a video clip with the poem “Ae khoon ke pyase baat suno” playing in the background.
The FIR was filed by City A-Division Police Station, Jamnagar, alleging violations under Sections 196, 197, 299, 302, and 57 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
Section 196 pertains to promoting enmity between different groups on grounds such as religion, race, or language, and engaging in acts prejudicial to harmony.
On January 17, 2025, the Gujarat High Court refused to quash the FIR, emphasizing the need for further investigation and highlighting Pratapgarhi's alleged non-cooperation with the investigation process.
The High Court noted that the poem’s references appeared to challenge authority, with responses to the post potentially disturbing social harmony. The court stressed the responsibility of an MP to uphold communal peace.
“Looking at the tenor of the poem, it certainly indicates something about the throne. The responses received to the said post by other persons also indicate that the message was posted in a manner which could certainly create disturbance in social harmony.
It is expected from any citizen of India that they should behave in a manner that does not disrupt communal or social harmony, and the petitioner, who is a Member of Parliament, is expected to behave more responsibly given his knowledge of the repercussions of such posts,” the court stated.
The High Court also underscored Pratapgarhi’s failure to respond to investigation notices issued on January 4 and 15, requiring his presence on January 11 and 22, respectively. The court highlighted that Pratapgarhi was expected to cooperate with legal procedures and uphold the rule of law as a lawmaker.
The bench referred to principles established by the Supreme Court in previous cases, reiterating that FIRs should not be quashed at the initial stage without thorough investigation.
UNI SNG CS1604