138 NI Act | Admission Of Signatures On Cheque Triggers Statutory Presumption Of Debt: Punjab & Haryana HC Magistrate Cannot Straightaway Issue NBW For Non-Appearance If Accused Is Already On Bail; Bail Valid Until Cancelled: Orissa High Court Bank Cannot Dishonour Cheques Merely Because Account Title Changed From Partnership To Proprietorship: Madhya Pradesh High Court Environmental Clearance Is Site-Specific; Violations At Different Site By Related Entity Not Ground To Deny New EC: Kerala High Court Advocate’s Failure To Formally Prove Fee Bill Not Fatal To Claim If Oral Evidence Establishes Non-Payment Of Agreed Professional Fees: Delhi High Court Police Officers Cannot Fight Over Specific Postings; Disciplined Force Must Prioritize Public Interest Over Location: Karnataka High Court RERA Section 18 Interest For Delayed Possession Is An Unqualified Absolute Right; Notice Under Section 55 Contract Act Not Required: Bombay High Court State Cannot Hand Over Additional Charge Of Sensitive Posts To Tainted Officers Facing Disciplinary Action: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mandatory Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Essential If Accused Resides Outside Jurisdiction; Commercial Breach Not Criminal Offence: Calcutta High Court Disciplinary Enquiry Cannot Be Quashed Merely For Delay In Conclusion; 6-Month Timeline Under G.O.Ms.No.679 Is Directory: Andhra Pradesh High Court Exoneration In Adjudication Proceedings No Bar To Criminal Prosecution If CBI Collects Independent Evidence Of Forgery & Conspiracy: Bombay High Court Public Prosecutor Not A 'Post Office' Of Investigating Agency; Independent Application Of Mind Mandatory For Extending Remand Beyond 180 Days Under NDPS Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Complainant Cannot Use Section 311 CrPC To Reopen Pre-Charge Stage After Explicit Waiver & Framing Of Charges: Allahabad High Court Bomb Blast In Train Is An 'Accident' Under Railways Act, Union Of India Liable To Pay Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Bail Hearing Can Proceed In Informant's Absence If Notice Was Served Despite Section 483(2) BNSS Mandate: Allahabad High Court

HIGH COURT QUASHES SEDITION FIR AGAINST SCHOOL: SCHOOL HAVE USED THE MINOR CHILDREN FOR PLAY CRITICIZING CAA, NRC  AND ABUSIVE LANGUAGE AGAINST PM MODI.

04 September 2024 10:16 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, has quashed the sedition FIR registered against four school officials for enacting a play that criticized government measures and made derogatory remarks against the Prime Minister. The court held that the play did not incite violence or create public disorder, emphasizing that citizens have the right to criticize government actions within reasonable limits.

The bench, presided over by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar, highlighted the importance of free speech and constructive criticism of government policies. Quoting from the judgement, the court stated, "A citizen has a right to criticize or comment upon the measures undertaken by the government and its functionaries, so long as he does not incite people to resort to violence against the government established by law or with the intention of creating public disorder."

The allegations against the petitioners, who were identified as Allauddin, Abdul Khaleq, Mohd. Bilal Inamdar, and Mohd. Mehatab, revolved around their involvement in the enactment of a play within the premises of Shaheen School in Bidar. The play allegedly portrayed potential consequences for Muslims if certain government enactments were implemented, while also featuring abusive language directed at the Prime Minister.

The court emphasized that the play was not intended to incite violence or promote enmity between different religious groups. It further underscored the responsibility of educational institutions to focus on imparting knowledge and nurturing young minds, rather than indulging in political criticism or insulting constitutional functionaries.

Quoting the judgement, the court stated, "The school is supposed to impart education and encourage learning among young minds... They should be fed with knowledge, technology, etc., which benefits them in their upcoming curriculum of academic period. Therefore the schools have to channelize the river of knowledge towards children for their welfare and betterment of society and not indulge in teaching the children to criticize the policies of the government."

The court ruled that the registration of the FIR for offenses under Sections 504, 505(2), 124A, 153A, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was without substance, and the continuation of the investigation would be an abuse of the legal process. The judgement referred to previous cases, including Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar and Vinod Dua v. Union of India, to establish the parameters of free speech and the offense of sedition.

Date of Decision:14th June 2023

ALLAUDDIN,S vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

Latest Legal News