The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to hear a petition from Gurudath Shetty, a resident of Bengaluru, seeking to quash a First Information Report (FIR) filed by Gujarat Police. The FIR relates to a social media post allegedly targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Supreme Court Decision
A Bench consisting of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi, heard Shetty’s plea. The petition challenged the FIR lodged against him for a post originating from a parody account titled “Jawaharlal Nehru Satire” on the platform X (formerly Twitter). Shetty was booked under Section 336(4) and Section 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for cognisable and bailable offenses.
Shetty’s counsel initially requested a temporary period of protection, stating a need for “5–7 days’ notice” to prepare a defense, emphasizing the bailable nature of the alleged offenses. The counsel also argued that Shetty had only reposted the content in question, adding a question mark.
Court’s Response
The Chief Justice inquired whether the petitioner wished the court to review the post’s contents aloud. When informed that the post was not included with the petition, the CJI expressed concern over a perceived lack of remorse. He stated, “You have not annexed it because you have no sense of repentance.”
The Court ultimately dismissed the petition, stating it did not meet the criteria for exercising its discretionary jurisdiction. The order specifically noted that the petitioner had “brazenly abused the pristine fundamental right of free expression and speech.”
Despite clarifying that Shetty remained free to seek remedies through the appropriate High Court, the Bench denied any immediate protection from legal proceedings.
According to the FIR, the complainant alleges the post was intended to damage the Prime Minister’s reputation. Shetty’s petition detailed an incident where Ahmedabad police arrived at his Bengaluru residence on November 10 without a warrant, detaining him and transporting him to Gujarat before releasing him late that night and serving him a notice under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
Shetty’s petition argued the FIR was illegal, arbitrary, and violated constitutional safeguards, as well as provisions within the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He also sought a stay on the notice, claiming it contradicted previous Supreme Court rulings in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and violated Section 35 of the BNSS.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the basis of the FIR against Gurudath Shetty?
The FIR was registered by Gujarat Police over a social media post allegedly targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which originated from a parody account titled “Jawaharlal Nehru Satire” on the platform X (formerly Twitter).
What did Gurudath Shetty’s counsel request from the Supreme Court?
Shetty’s counsel requested a temporary period of protection, specifically 5–7 days, to allow the petitioner to approach the appropriate High Court.
Why did the Supreme Court dismiss the petition?
The Court dismissed the petition, stating it was not a fit case for the exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction and that the petitioner had “brazenly abused the pristine fundamental right of free expression and speech.”
As Shetty is now free to pursue remedies through the High Court, it remains to be seen whether he will do so, and what course of action the Gujarat Police will take in pursuing the investigation.
