'How Is Acknowledging Partition Communal?': MP High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Against State BJP Program

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Monday refused to entertain a PIL against a July 31 Facebook post published by a BJP leader announcing formation of a committee to organize a program 'Har Ghar Tiranga- Tiranga Yatra Avam Vibhajan Vibhishika Diwas' scheduled for August 15.

The plea claimed that the district president of BJP posted a message on her Facebook account mentioning that under the directions of State President and MLA BJP, a district team had been constituted for convening the program. The plea claimed this violated Constitution and was punishable under Section 196 BNS.

Section 196 BNS pertains to Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.

The petitioner claimed that including Vibhajan Vibhishika Diwas' (Partition Horrors Remembrance Day) in the Independence Day celebrations could incite communal disharmony and was contrary to the secular and unifying principles of the Constitution. 

The plea sought direction to the authorities to register a case under Section 196 BNS against respondent no. 5 (state BJP President) and 6 (District President BJP). It further sought a direction to immediately delete the Facebook post. 

It further sought a direction to respondent 5 and 6 not to create disharmony amongst people of different religion/castes in future.  

After reviewing the petition and the arguments, the bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf granted liberty to withdraw the petition and thus, ordered:

"Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks withdrawal of the petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as withdrawn".

During the hearing, the bench inquired from the petitioner's counsel as to how acknowledging the partition tragedy could be construed as communal.

"How does it become communal. How does it become something which divides the country?", the bench orally asked. The petitioner's counsel said that partition was being celebrated.

The court further distinguished between acknowledging and celebrating, orally remarking that, "If you pay homage to the martyr, will that be a celebration? Is this a celebration?".

When the petitioner insisted that the program amounted to a celebration of the partition, the court said:

"There is a program they are organizing to recognize a historical event, to make the recognition successful, they have made this toli (committee)...Two things happened, we got independence and partition happened...We do not celebrate it as a function. We recognize it as a historical event, pay homage to the people who lost their lives on both sides and solemn functions are held".

The bench further orally asked, "Is this a petition to be filed? A political petition?". The petitioner's counsel said that the proposed event was trying to create hatred amongst communities. 

After hearing the matter for some time the court permitted the petition to be withdrawn. 

Case Title: Saurabh Nath Sharma v State of Madhya Pradesh (WP 31146 of 2025)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 174

For Petitioner: Advocate Ashok Kumar Gupta and Mayur Thakur 

For Respondent: Additional Advocate General H.S. Ruprah with Advocate Akash Malpani

Click here to read the Order