Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act is otherwise bound to fail in any eventuality and no fruitful purpose would be served by putting the petitioner to ordeal of protracted trial, which otherwise is bound to culminate in his acquittal.

5. Pursuant to notices issued in the instant proceedings, respondent-State has filed detailed reply under the signatures of Superintendent of Police, CID, Crime, HP, Shimla, wherein facts, as have been noticed hereinabove, are not disputed, rather stand admitted. During pendency of the case at hand, respondent-State on direction issued by this Court has also filed status report under the signatures of SHO Police Station CID, Shimla at Bharari, HP perusal whereof reveals that after completion of investigation, charges against the petitioner under Sections 124-A, 153-A read with Section 120-B of Indian Penal code were dropped and charge sheet against him was filed under Sections 505 of Indian Penal code and Section 3 of Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, which is pending adjudication.

social media and as such, he is required to be dealt with in accordance with law. Mr. Kahol, further stated that bare perusal of FIR, if read juxtaposing provisions contained under Section 505 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act discloses prima-facie case against the petitioner under Section 505 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act 1922 and as such, prayer made on behalf of petitioner for quashing of FIR deserves outright rejection.

to agree with Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, for the reason that at no point of time petitioner ever attempted to instigate or provoke Police officials to raise protest against Government, rather he himself warned Government as well as its officials that in case, needful is not done for the welfare of the Police officials, he would be compelled to launch agitation against the Government. No doubt, words and expressions used by the petitioner in the posts uploaded by him on social media suggests that he repeatedly reminded Government and Department that in case, needful for the welfare of the Police officials is not done within shortest possible time, they may start protest, but certainly there appears to be no intent, if any, on the part of the petitioner to provoke or incite police officials to start protest against government for non-implementation of their demands. Initially, case under Section 124-A, 153-B, 120-B and 505 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act was lodged against the petitioner, but after completion of investigation, charges under Sections 124-A, 153-A and 120-B were dropped and charges under Section 505 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act were retained.

29. Having seen the content of the posts, which are considered to be objectionable having tendency to create public disorder, this Court is persuaded to agree with learned Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner that no case much less under Section 505 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act is made out against the petitioner and as such, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting prosecution on the basis of FIR, which otherwise does not disclose commission of offence punishable Section 505 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act. Since prosecution is bound to fail in all probabilities for the reasons discussed hereinabove, no fruitful purpose would be served by putting the petitioner to the ordeal of protracted trial, which is otherwise bound to culminate in the acquittal of the accused.