The Patna High Court granted bail to a man who was accused of using objectionable language against the Prime Minister of India and his deceased mother during a political rally and in a video that later circulated on social media. The case originated from an FIR registered at the Simri police station concerning allegations that, at a political gathering organised by opposition leaders, offensive words were used against the Prime Minister and his late mother, and footage of the incident was allegedly made viral. The police investigation, which named the petitioner among those allegedly involved, led to charges being framed under multiple provisions of the penal law relating to public order and insult, including sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the Information Technology Act. The petitioner was arrested in connection with the case and had been in custody since late August of the previous year.
In his bail application before the High Court, the petitioner contended that he had been falsely implicated in the case. He argued that he had been identified only on the basis of a viral video by a local watchman and that no offensive or objectionable material was recovered from his mobile phone during the investigation. He further submitted that there was no evidence to suggest that he had made the video viral on social media platforms. The defence also pointed out that no other individual had been arrested in the matter, suggesting that he had been made a scapegoat for the actions attributed to others at the event. The petitioner’s counsel emphasised his clean antecedents and contended that the charge under the Information Technology Act was not made out against him in light of the absence of any relevant evidence linking him to the dissemination of the alleged video.
The State opposed the bail application, submitting that the act attributed to the petitioner was serious in nature and had the potential to cause public unrest. It was argued that such conduct could disturb public tranquility and serve to insult the dignity of the highest constitutional office, and the prosecution described the conduct as having serious implications for public order. Despite these submissions, the High Court, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, concluded that the petitioner was entitled to bail. In its order, the Court took into account the nature of the allegations, the period of custody the petitioner had already undergone, and the fact that the charge-sheet in the case had been filed. The Court also observed that the petitioner had no prior criminal antecedents, which weighed in favour of granting bail.
Balancing these considerations, the High Court directed that the petitioner be released on bail, subject to his furnishing a bail bond of a specified amount along with two sureties of similar value, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate or the concerned trial court. The Court’s decision allows the petitioner to remain out of custody while the legal proceedings continue before the trial court, with his bail conditioned upon compliance with the bond requirements.
The proceedings in the case were titled Md. Rizvi @ Raja v. State of Bihar, and the bail order was passed by a Single Judge Bench of the Patna High Court presided over by Justice Arun Kumar Jha. The High Court’s decision to grant bail reflects its assessment that, in light of the available material and the petitioner’s circumstances, continued detention was not justified while the trial progresses, even though the charges relate to conduct alleged to have occurred in a highly charged political context.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.