Gujarat High Court Directs No Coercive Steps Against Congress Leader Booked For Alleged Objectionable Facebook Post On 'Operation Sindoor'
The Gujarat High Court directed the State not to take any coercive steps against Congress leader Rajesh Soni booked in an FIR for allegedly making a Facebook post which is stated to have questioned the "credibility of the Indian Army" during “Operation Sindoor”.
The court however said that the investigation shall continue and directed Soni to co-operate with the same.
The prosecution claimed that the Police Inspector of Cyber Crime Cell, monitoring various social media platforms, came across a Facebook page under the name “Rajesh Soni – Delegate AICC – General Secretary, Gujarat Congress, which according to the complainant, was found to have published multiple posts that were allegedly misleading and anti-social.
It was alleged that, one of the posts questioned the credibility and commitment of the Indian Army during a military operation titled as “Operation Sindoor”, which according to the complainant, could potentially shake the faith of the general public in the Armed forces.
The FIR was registered under BNS Sections 152(Acts endangering sovereignty unity and integrity of India) and 353(1)(a). Section 353 pertains to statements conducing to public mischief wherein subsection 1(a) pertains to publication or circulation of any statement, false information, rumour, or report, including through electronic means, with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, any officer, soldier, sailor or airman in the Army, Navy or Air Force of India to mutiny or otherwise disregard or fail in his duty as such.
Justice Hasmukh D Suthar in his June 20 order observed that complaint was filed by Cyber Crime Cell, CID Crime and during monitoring on social media platforms, alleged posts came to be noticed during Cyber patrolling and thereafter complaint was filed.
"It further appears that in the present case, although there is a visible representation and electronic comments, there is no material to suggest that the posts made by the petitioner amount to inciting or attempting to incite secession, armed rebellion, subversive activities, or encourage feelings of separatism, or endanger the sovereignty, unity, or integrity of India. Further, perusing the explanation, the said comments do not amount to expressing disapprobation of the measures, or administrative or other action of the Government," it said.
The high court thereafter referred to Supreme Court's decision in Imran Pratapgarhi as per which it is required that a preliminary inquiry be conducted before the registration of an FIR.
The high court observed that there was "no material on record which attracts" the alleged offences. It said, "However, without verifying these facts or forming the requisite satisfaction, the impugned FIR has been registered. Further, learned APP is unable to point out any consequences or any violation, disruption or institutional disobedience, nor any direct or indirect act which interfere with the military operations or public servants' duties, which lead to mutiny".
Issuing notice on Soni's plea to quash the FIR and listing the matter on August 12 the high court said:
"Meanwhile, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner qua the offence under Sections 152 and 353(1)(a) of BNS. However, let investigation for the offence in question be continued. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation".
Soni's Counsel submitted that the FIR was filed with malafide intent solely to harass the petitioner who had merely "reposted content that he had received from another source".
He urged that the Soni's action do no satisfy the essential ingredients of the alleged offences as there was no incitement to secession, armed rebellion or any subversive activity or any act disrupting military operations or duties of public servants. He pointed out the complainant has been filed an FIR based on 'alleged false post or rumour' to win 'cheap popularity'.
He contended Soni has neither waged war nor disturbed the peace of country and prima facie his comments does not attract the alleged offence furthermore, when he was arrested and produced before the Magistrate, no remand was sought. He argued that similar content including videos and parodies remains available on social media. Thus, the FIR is nothing but 'gross abuse of process of law' and requested to stay further proceedings in connection with the FIR.
Opposing the petition, the State's Counsel argued the posts made by Soni were misleading and anti-social in nature and he has posted several messages on social media platforms that involves the dissemination and circulation of false statements, rumours, or reports, particularly those intended to cause public unrest, spread fear, or incite offences against the State or public tranquillity. Therefore, prima facie, the alleged offence are attracted. Further, He emphasized that the investigation was still ongoing and urged the Court not to grant any interim relief at this stage.
Case Title: Rajesh Thanaji Soni vs State of Gujarat & Ors.
Case Number: Special Criminal Application (Quashing) No. 8446 of 2025