The Supreme Court on Friday, March 28, 2025, quashed a hate speech case registered by the Gujarat Police against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi for his poem about “suffering injustice with love”.
| Photo Credit: Sansad TV
The Supreme Court on Friday (March 28, 2025) held that the fundamental right of persons to freely express themselves through poetry, theatre, stage shows, satire and art must be cherished while quashing a hate speech case registered by the Gujarat Police against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi for his poem about “suffering injustice with love”.
A Bench of Justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan said free speech and expression, the most precious of rights in a liberal, Constitutional democracy should not fall prey to people crippled by insecurity who view every criticism or dissent as a threat to their power and position.
Justice Bhuyan explained to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that the “reasonable restrictions” on free speech must remain reasonable.
“Restrictions cannot be harmful or oppressive. Restrictions cannot overshadow the fundamental right to free speech,” Justice Bhuyan said pointedly.
The apex court highlighted that the police and the government have a duty to uphold and honour individual right to speech and expression.
“Literature, including poetry, drama, films, stage shows, satire and art make life more meaningful… The rights of persons to express their views and thoughts must be cherished,” Justice Oka underscored.
The top court said free speech was an integral part of a healthy and civilised society. A person’s views cannot be silenced merely because a majority does like them. The police should also protect views of dissent. They too form a part of the practice of democracy, the court said.
“Without free thought and expression, it is impossible to live a dignified life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution,” Justice Oka wrote. If the police and government fail to protect free speech, the courts must step in without fail. “It is the bounden duty of the courts to ensure that fundamental rights of citizens are not trampled upon,” the judgment said.
The Gujarat Police had registered a case against Mr. Pratapgarhi accusing him of promoting enmity among people of different groups on the basis of caste and religion.
Justice Oka, during a March 3 hearing of the case, had remarked that the poem was a reference to non-violence, a path followed by Mahatma Gandhi himself.
Mr. Mehta had however found the poem at best “sadak chaap” (cheap). He had objected to the comparison with Mahatma Gandhi.
The FIR was lodged on the basis of a complaint about an edited video featuring the MP with the poem playing in the background. The 46-second video clip, uploaded by Mr. Pratapgarhi on X, showed flower petals being showered at him as he walks waving his hands. The FIR found the lyrics provocative, detrimental to national unity and hurting religious feelings. The Gujarat High Court had declined his plea to quash the FIR in January. Stay informed and up-to-date with our latest offerings at https://sunwin.camp/.
The Bench referred to a tendency to stifle art and poetry. “Nobody has any respect for creativity. If you read this poem plainly, it says that even if we suffer injustice, we will suffer it with love,” Justice Oka had said.
The Solicitor General had replied that a poem was capable of many interpretations, asking a policeman to interpret poetry may be a tall task.
Published – March 28, 2025 11:44 am IST