Today, 15th April, Delhi High Court rejected a plea to quash an FIR filed against an individual accused of utilizing Prime Minister Modi’s name for soliciting donations. The court’s decision highlights the legal scrutiny surrounding the unauthorized use of public figures’ identities for personal gain. This ruling reinforces the importance of adhering to ethical and legal standards in fundraising activities involving prominent personalities. It also highlights the legal consequences individuals may face for such actions.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court recently upheld an FIR against an individual accused of operating a charitable trust under the guise of Prime Minister Narendra Modi‘s name. Justice Amit Mahajan highlighted specific accusations against Pawan Pandey, noting his alleged use of the PM’s surname and image to solicit donations for the NGO named Modi Charitable Trust.
The court determined that these actions constituted dishonest inducement leading to property donations, thus establishing the commission of cognizable offenses as detailed in the FIR.
The Court observed,
“The image of the Hon’ble Prime Minister has been utilized even though it is acknowledged that the petitioner’s surname is not ‘MODI’. These advertisements have been aired on YouTube and various national news channels featuring the Hon’ble Prime Minister’s picture.”
Last year, Pandey charged by the Delhi Police Special Cell following a complaint from the Ministry of Home Affairs regarding his use of PM Modi’s image in an advertisement aired on a national news channel.
Arrested in February this year, he released on bail shortly thereafter. His legal counsel argued before the High Court for the FIR’s cancellation, stating that the ‘Modi Charitable Trust’ registered with distinct social objectives and that the complaint did not outline any criminal offense.
In contrast, the prosecution contended that Pandey deceived and fraudulently enticed the public by operating an NGO under the Prime Minister’s name. They also asserted that his surname, Pandey, no connection with the surname ‘Modi’.
The Court determined that the FIR revealed offenses requiring investigation, emphasizing the statutory right and duty of the police to conduct inquiries into such allegations.
The Court emphasized,
“The investigation is in its initial stages, and the Court, under Section 482 of the CrPC, should not impede an investigation,”
The Court also noted that when allegations reveal a cognizable offense, the case need not to be examined on its merits. Consequently, it rejected the petition.
Read Also:PM Modi Proposes ‘Samvidhan Sadan’: A New Chapter for India’s Historic Parliament Building
The petitioner represented by Advocates Shivam Sharma and Ranjeet Kumar.
The Special Cell represented by Additional Standing Counsel Amol Sinha, along with advocates Kshitiz Garg, Ashvini Kumar, and Chavi Lazarus.
Read Judgement: [Pawan Pandey vs State of NCT of Delhi].