Madhya Pradesh High Court denied Congress worker Yadvendra Yadav’s plea to quash FIR over a Facebook post on PM Modi and war with Pakistan. Court said investigation is ongoing and evidence must be tested at trial.
Gwalior: On July 11, the Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to quash the FIR filed against Congress worker Yadvendra Yadav over a controversial Facebook post allegedly targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Indian Armed Forces.
The case came up before a Single Bench of Justice Vishal Mishra, who made it clear that courts must tread carefully when it comes to interfering in ongoing investigations.
The FIR against Yadav was registered after a complaint accused him of uploading and sharing images and a video on Facebook, which allegedly suggested that Prime Minister Modi had “withdrawn” from a military confrontation with Pakistan under foreign pressure.
The complaint also stated that Yadav had used inappropriate and offensive language against the Indian Armed Forces, allegedly trying to tarnish their image.
While hearing the petition, the Court highlighted that it would not intervene at this early stage of the investigation.
Justice Vishal Mishra said,
“There is a very limited scope of interference in a petition seeking quashment of the FIR. The High Court should be vigilant and should interfere in rare of rarest cases where prima facie looking to the FIR no offence is made out against the concern, but in the present case, there is sufficient material collected by the prosecution against the petitioner. Furthermore, the investigation in the matter is still pending.”
Yadav, who is a Congress party member and also the Up-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Singhpur, had approached the Court seeking quashing of the FIR.
He was represented by Advocate Sanjeev Kumar Singh, while Deputy Advocate General Swapnil Ganguly appeared for the State.
The High Court took note of the allegations but stressed that the issues raised in the plea could only be resolved through a proper trial.
Justice Mishra observed,
“The grounds which are being raised are all matter of evidence that is to be establish before the trial Court. At this stage, it cannot be concluded that the allegations made in the complaint/FIR have a truth of ring or not or whether ingredients of the offences alleged are made out or not.”
The Court also emphasized that the High Court should not act like an appellate body while dealing with such matters. It explained that courts should avoid evaluating the evidence prematurely and must allow the investigation to run its course.
ALSO READ: Suo Moto Cases At An All-Time High: Supreme Court Review 2024
Justice Mishra stated,
“The Court made it clear that the High Court does not function as an appellate authority when considering the quashing of criminal proceedings and must refrain from scrutinizing the merits of the case while the investigation is still underway.”
Further, the Court reiterated that detailed examination of the FIR’s contents or evidence is not within the High Court’s scope at this stage.
Justice Mishra concluded,
“The Court said that position of law is settled that the High Court cannot embark upon appreciation of evidence and cannot undertake a detailed examination of the facts contained in the FIR by acting as an appellate court.”
In view of these findings and the ongoing status of the investigation, the Court held that no case had been made out for quashing the FIR.
Accordingly, it dismissed the petition filed by Yadav. Justice Mishra ruled,
“The Court said that no case is made out warranting interference as the investigation is pending in the matter. Accordingly, the Court dismissed Yadav’s petition seeking quashing of the FIR.”
Case Title:
Yadvendra Pandey v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., [2025:MPHC-JBP:27563]
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Suo Moto
