There’ll Be Serious Actions If You Remand People Mechanically For Social Media Posts

The Andhra Pradesh Excessive Court docket points a stern warning to magistrates, urging strict compliance with SC rulings towards routine arrests for social media posts, or face contempt and disciplinary motion.

Thanks for studying this put up, do not forget to subscribe!

ANDHRA PRADESH: The Excessive Court docket of Andhra Pradesh, by way of Round No. 8/2025 dated 05.07.2025, has issued strict instructions to all Judicial Magistrates within the state, emphasizing adherence to the landmark Supreme Court docket judgments in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Imran Pratapgarhi v. State of Gujarat.

The round addresses the rising development of a number of FIRs being registered throughout varied police stations for social media posts or feedback the place the utmost punishment is lower than seven years. It was noticed that many Magistrates have been mechanically remanding accused individuals with out complying with the safeguards laid down in these key judgments.

ALSO READ: Andhra Pradesh High Court: SC Status Lost After Conversion to Christianity

In Arnesh Kumar, the Supreme Court docket mandated that arrests in such instances shouldn’t be automated and that Magistrates should be glad that the arrest is important, particularly when offences are punishable with lower than seven years of imprisonment.

Additional strengthening this safeguard, the Supreme Court docket in Imran Pratapgarhi (2025) dominated that earlier than registering an FIR in instances involving speech, writing, or creative expression (with punishment between 3 to 7 years), a preliminary enquiry should be performed underneath Part 173(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and solely after approval from a Deputy Superintendent of Police. This enquiry should be accomplished inside 14 days.

In gentle of those rulings, the Excessive Court docket has instructed Magistrates to make sure compliance earlier than ordering any remand in such instances, failing which they might face contempt of court docket and departmental proceedings. The round is a big transfer to uphold the correct to free speech and be certain that the prison justice course of will not be misused to suppress lawful expression.

Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar

Within the landmark judgment of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court docket addressed the rampant misuse of Part 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Part 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, each of that are cognizable and non-bailable offences.

The case arose when Arnesh Kumar’s spouse accused him and his household of dowry calls for, and his anticipatory bail was denied by decrease courts.

The Supreme Court docket noticed that arrests in such instances have been being made in a mechanical and routine method, typically with none real want, resulting in harassment of harmless folks, together with aged kin and ladies dwelling overseas.

The Court docket famous that the police incessantly failed to use their thoughts or justify arrests underneath Part 41 of the Prison Process Code (CrPC), regardless of authorized safeguards. Emphasizing the necessity to steadiness particular person liberty with societal order, the Court docket laid down particular tips.

It dominated that police should justify arrests underneath Part 41(1)(b)(ii) CrPC with written causes, and should difficulty a discover underneath Part 41A CrPC in instances the place arrest will not be instantly mandatory. Moreover, Magistrates should not authorize detention until they’re glad, after judicial scrutiny, that the arrest was lawful and mandatory.

The Court docket warned that any violation of those instructions by law enforcement officials or judicial magistrates may result in departmental motion and even contempt of court docket proceedings.

This judgment not solely strengthened procedural safeguards in matrimonial disputes but additionally grew to become a cornerstone ruling governing all arrests the place the punishment is lower than or as much as seven years, notably advancing the reason for civil liberties in India.

Case Title: Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) No.9127 of 2013

READ JUDGMENT HERE

Imran Pratapgadhi v State of Gujarat

In Imran Pratapgarhi v. State of Gujarat (2025), the Supreme Court docket handled the prison prosecution of a Rajya Sabha MP, Imran Pratapgarhi, who was booked underneath a number of provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), together with Sections 196, 197, 299, 302, 57, 3(5) for reciting and sharing a poem by way of a social media video.

The poem, posted on the platform ‘X’, was alleged to incite communal disharmony and hatred. The criticism claimed it provoked enmity and harm spiritual sentiments, although the poem itself broadly addressed injustice and referred to as for non-violent resistance.

The Court docket totally analyzed the poem’s content material and held that it didn’t confer with any faith, caste, or neighborhood, nor did it advocate violence or enmity. As a substitute, the poem expressed dissent and sacrifice within the face of oppression, aligning with ideas of non-violence and democratic protest.

The Court docket emphasised the significance of Article 19(1)(a), the correct to free speech and reiterated that criticism of governance or expression of unpopular views is protected in a constitutional democracy.

It dominated that not one of the alleged offences have been made out on the face of the criticism, and that the police didn’t conduct the necessary preliminary inquiry underneath Part 173(3) of the BNSS earlier than registering the FIR in a speech-related matter.

The Supreme Court docket condemned the mechanical registration of FIRs in such instances and reminded each police and courts of their obligation to uphold constitutional freedoms, warning that failure to take action undermines the rule of regulation.

The FIR was quashed, reinforcing that creative or political expression can’t be criminalized merely as a result of it offends or unsettles some.

Case Title: Imran Pratapgadhi v State of Gujarat
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1545 OF 2025

READ JUDGMENT HERE

READ CIRCULATION HERE

FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES