On June 6, the Gujarat High Court denied bail to Congress leader Afzal Lakhani for ‘anti-Indian, pro-Pakistani’ posts on Facebook, and for posting objectionable and derogatory remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his mother.
The court said, “People who stay in India must be faithful to India…On perusal of the material, the applicant has made certain comments which may hurt the sentiments of a particular community and there are certain posts which are abusive in nature. There are other materials which are of such nature which may have a larger impact on the society.”
In the FIR, the complainant informed the police about a Facebook page posting certain content which was not just “offending, objectionable and abusive” against the Prime Minister and his mother, but it could “affect the commune harmony as well and may create an unrest in the society.” The impugned Facebook posts aim to “create enmity between two communities” and insult PM Modi and his mother.
Congress leader’s counsel contended that he is “regretting his act and he should not have done this and he shall not do such things in future.” The counsel further submitted that the maximum punishment under the provisions is five years, and thus he should be enlarged on bail.
However, the state’s counsel, APP Manan Mehta, opposed bail to Lakhani. The counsel contended that the Congress leader is a habitual offender, and another FIR was also registered against him for posting such kinds of photographs, articles and quotes on his Facebook page. The counsel also submitted a printout of the accused’s Facebook page and the objectionable posts. The APP also contended that the Congress leader posted anti-Indian, pro-Pakistani content on his page and the nature of the posts were such that it could create communal unrest.
The APP further argued that Lakhani also posted obscene and pornographic material on the page, which would malign the image of the Prime Minister and affect the sentiments of a particular community. Furthermore, Mehta also submitted that the accused “used a modus operandi whereby he has created 18 different Facebook pages through his two different mobile phones and also made international calls to Pakistan and other countries and also received phone calls from other neighboring countries.”
Mehta also submitted that the Congress leader used different fake Facebook accounts to comment on his pages, attempting to increase tensions between the two communities.
The court agreed with Mehta’s contentions. The court said, “I have found that the present applicant has also made certain comments which may hurt the sentiments of a particular community and there are certain posts which are containing abusive language as well as some material which is of such kind that it may have a larger impact over the peace and brotherhood in the society.”
“One can understand that a person may have like or dislike against any person but it does not mean that he may start using derogatory and abusive language for the Hon’ble the Prime Minister of Country and his late mother,” said the court. The court further said that the language of the Congress leader’s post was so derogatory that it is not possible for the court to reproduce the materials in the order and thus, a general observation is being made in the order.
The court noted that Lakhani, who is an Indian citizen, has “made all the attempts to destabilize the peace in the society and prima facie, posted by the present applicant seems to be agenda driven post.” Furthermore, the court said that while the maximum punishment under the applicable provisions is five years, the court does not see “any reason to show any leniency upon the present applicant and to enlarge him on bail.”
The court observed that Lakhani posted the derogatory content on Facebook not just to malign the image of the Prime Minister, but to fulfil his personal hidden agenda. The court said, “If such person is granted bail, there are all the chances that he may commit such offence once again by using another name and by creating fake IDs as the technology has advanced by now and once if such person is permitted to roam freely in the society, they may do the damage by his post on social media and once the damage is done, there is no point in arresting that person and punish him because larger damage by the time, such person is identified would already be done in form of disturbance of peace, harmony and brotherhood in the society, as social media is a very powerful tool to influence people.”
Comments