Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition challenging an FIR over a social media post targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi, stating that “emotions cannot be permitted to overflow to disrespect constitutional authorities” with such remarks or language.
Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court rejected a petition aimed at quashing an FIR filed against Ajeet Yadav for an alleged Facebook post that targeted Prime Minister Narendra Modi following the cessation of military action between India and Pakistan on May 10.
During the proceedings, Yadav’s lawyer argued that his client was overwhelmed by emotion when he made the post.
Also Read: PM Modi Fake Video Case | Congress Leader AK Bereddy Granted Bail by Delhi Court
However, a division bench consisting of Justices J.J. Munir and Anil Kumar countered this argument, stating,
“The post written by the petitioner against the prime minister carried scurrilous language against the head of the government. Emotions cannot be permitted to overflow to an extent that constitutional authorities of the country are dragged into disrepute by the use of disrespectful words.”
The court dismissed the petition, ruling that it was inappropriate to intervene with the FIR under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Also Read: PM Modi Targets Congress Over Waqf Act: “Congress Only Appeased Fundamentalists”
Yadav has been charged under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for allegedly using derogatory language directed at the prime minister regarding the stay in military action after the Pahalgam terror attack that resulted in the deaths of 26 people on April 22.
Article 226 of the Constitution of India empowers the High Courts to issue certain writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose.
Also Read: ‘Cong Frustrated Because….’: PM Modi on Row Over Attending Ganesh Puja at CJI’s House
This means that if a person’s fundamental rights are violated or if there is any illegality or misuse of power by a public authority, the affected individual can directly approach the High Court under Article 226 for immediate relief.
Unlike Article 32, which is limited to the Supreme Court and mainly deals with fundamental rights, Article 226 grants a wider jurisdiction to High Courts to protect rights and ensure justice across their respective states.
This article is a crucial tool in the Indian judicial system for speedy and effective justice.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
