Today, On 13th October, Supreme Court refused singer and activist Neha Singh Rathore’s plea challenging an FIR over her social media post on the Pahalgam terror attack. The Court told her, “Go and face trial,” without commenting on the case merits.
The Supreme Court instructed singer and activist Neha Singh Rathore to face trial , dismissing her plea that challenged an FIR filed against her regarding a social media post about the Pahalgam terror attack.
The court emphasized that it was not commenting on the merits of the case.
A bench comprising Justices J K Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi stated that it would not intervene at this stage concerning the charge of mutiny (endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India).
Additionally, the apex court allowed Rathore the opportunity to raise her concerns during the framing of charges.
Bhojpuri singer and activist Neha Singh, challenging an FIR registered against her over her social media posts concerning Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Bihar elections, and Hindu-Muslim politics.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the case, raised strong objections over certain charges.
He said,
“I can’t be tried for mutiny. Quash the other some sections for the others I will face trial.”
Justice Maheshwari responded,
“You may raise these objections at the time of framing of charges we can grant you that liberty.”
Sibal clarified further, stating,
“I already have that liberty. How can I be tried for mutiny? Simply expressing something about someone shouldn’t lead to such a charge. Meanwhile I can get arrested.”
The Court observed that it would not interfere at this stage with the argument regarding the mutiny charge but allowed Sibal to raise these objections when the charges are formally framed.
The Court noted,
“We are not commenting on the merits of the case.”
Sibal also argued that the charges relate to waging a war, adding,
“Charges relate to waging a war. Am I waging a war through my tweets? Meanwhile, I could be arrested.”
Earlier, On September 19, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition from Bhojpuri folk singer Neha Singh Rathore, who sought to quash an FIR against her for allegedly inflammatory social media posts. The court determined that the FIR revealed cognizable offenses and instructed Rathore to appear before the investigating officer later this month.
The FIR, filed on April 27, 2025, at the Hazratganj police station in Lucknow, accused Rathore of offenses under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including Sections 196, 197, 302, 152, and 353, as well as Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2008.
During the investigation, Sections 152 and 159 of the BNS were subsequently added.
Investigators referenced several of Rathore’s tweets that criticized Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP, alleging that the party was using terror incidents to advocate for war with Pakistan and distract from domestic issues.
One tweet implied that the ruling party was willing to sacrifice soldiers for political advantage, while another questioned media reports about victims refusing to recite religious verses before being killed.
The prosecution argued that these statements, which gained significant traction, including in Pakistan, posed a risk to India’s sovereignty and communal harmony.
Rathore, represented by senior counsel Kamal Kishore Sharma, contended that her posts constituted political criticism protected under free speech. Her counsel asserted that none of the alleged offenses applied, emphasizing that Rathore did not incite violence or disseminate false information.
They cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Imran Pratapgarhi vs State of Gujarat (2025), which recognized poetry critical of government policies as protected speech under Article 19(1)(a). Rathore also expressed her willingness to cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
The state government, represented by Government Advocate V.K. Singh, argued that the timing and nature of Rathore’s tweets rendered them more serious than mere political dissent.
Citing precedents such as Ramji Lal Modi (1957), Kedar Nath Singh (1962), and Bhajan Lal (1992), Singh maintained that speech undermining sovereignty, disrupting communal harmony, or disrespecting constitutional authorities could not claim absolute protection. He noted that similar petitions involving derogatory comments against leaders had previously been dismissed.
Agreeing with the state, the court concluded that the allegations in the FIR and the evidence in the case diary clearly indicated cognizable offenses, warranting an investigation.
The court found Rathore’s reliance on the Imran Pratapgarhi case to be misplaced, highlighting that the poetry in that instance did not invoke religion or name individuals, unlike Rathore’s posts, which directly referenced the Prime Minister and Home Minister in a derogatory manner.
The court emphasized that free speech loses its protection when it is expressed in a manner that risks inciting communal tensions or undermining national unity.
The bench stated,
“The fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) is not absolute, and restrictions may be imposed to prevent speech that incites violence, riots or public disorder.”
The court dismissed the writ petition as misconceived and declined to quash the FIR or prevent the police from proceeding with the case. However, it ordered that the investigation be conducted fairly, independently, and in strict accordance with the law.
Rathore has been directed to appear before the investigating officer on September 26 at 11 a.m. and to cooperate until the police report is filed.
Case Title: Neha Singh Rathore@ Neha Kumari v. State of Uttar Pradesh
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
