Allahabad High Court Denies Bail to Man Accused of Posting Objectionable Content Against PM and Armed Forces, Cautions on Misuse of Free Speech
By Rajesh Pandey
In a significant ruling that underscores the limits of constitutionally guaranteed free speech, the Allahabad High Court has rejected the bail application of a man accused of posting derogatory and inflammatory content on social media targeting the Prime Minister of India and the Indian Armed Forces.
The Court observed that freedom of speech and expression, while a fundamental right under the Constitution, does not extend to acts that show disrespect to national leaders or endanger social harmony and national unity.
The bail plea was filed by the accused Ashraf Khan, also known by the alias Nisrat, who is facing serious charges under the newly introduced provisions of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the restructured criminal code replacing the Indian Penal Code.
The charges include Section 152 BNS (acts endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India) and Section 197 BNS (imputations and assertions prejudicial to national integration).
The case is registered at Sasni Police Station in Hathras district, Uttar Pradesh.
Background of the Case
According to the prosecution, the accused is alleged to have uploaded a series of highly objectionable and manipulated video clips and posts on his Facebook account during the period of heightened military tension between India and Pakistan.
The content included edited visuals implying that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was running alongside a donkey cart with an aircraft attached, and depicted him as apologizing to Pakistan.
In another controversial post, the accused allegedly portrayed Wing Commander Vyomika Singh of the Indian Air Force seated alongside Pakistan’s Army Chief, suggesting collaboration or compromise.
One of the posts even stated “Pakistan Air Force Zindabad”, glorified Pakistani military strength, and depicted Indian aircraft being destroyed by Pakistani forces.
There were also posts critical of Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and additional disparaging material directed at the Prime Minister.
The state counsel, opposing the bail application, argued that such content was deeply disrespectful to the Indian Armed Forces and the Prime Minister, and was intended to spread misinformation, incite disharmony, and undermine national security and morale.
The counsel contended that the social media posts were not mere satire or political criticism, but rather deliberate and damaging attempts to insult national institutions and promote hostility.
The Court’s Observations
Delivering the order on July 2, Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal remarked strongly on the increasing misuse of social media under the garb of freedom of speech. The court said:
“It has unfortunately become a fashion among certain groups to misuse social media platforms by posting offensive and unfounded material against high-ranking dignitaries.
Such posts do not reflect the healthy use of free speech but are instead aimed at spreading hatred, provoking separatist sentiments, and disrupting public harmony.”
While acknowledging the importance of Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, which grants freedom of speech and expression, the court firmly held that this right is not absolute.
The court noted that such freedom cannot be misused to create social unrest, mock national figures, or undermine the integrity of state institutions, especially the armed forces.
“Freedom of expression under the Constitution is sacred but not unfettered.
It cannot be invoked as a shield for conduct that encourages enmity, disrespects national leadership, or endangers the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of the nation,” the Court asserted in its judgment.
