After erroneously spelling PM Narendra Modi’s name during a press conference, Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera has applied to the Allahabad High Court to have the First Information Report (FIR) filed against him dismissed [Pawan Khera v. State of Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Others].
A division bench consisting of Justices Sangeeta Chandra and Narendra Kumar Johari requested responses from the private complainants and the State of Uttar Pradesh regarding Khera’s plea on April 6.
Private complainants include:
– Mukesh Sharma, a Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) member of the UP Legislative Assembly; – Mahesh Chandra Srivastava, president of the BJP’s Kashi Region; and – Hen Samuel Changsan, an Assam BJP leader. Khera had mispronounced PM Narendra Modi’s name when she demanded a joint parliamentary investigation into the Adani-Hindenburg dispute at a recent press conference.
“Sorry, Damodardas Modi, what problem does Narendra Gautam Das have?” “If Narasimha Rao and Atal Bihari Vajpayee could form a Joint Parliamentary Committee,” Khera had stated.
Later, it appeared that he and a coworker had confirmed the middle name.
Khera has been accused by the BJP of deliberately changing the name.
Khera was arrested for violating Section 153A, which prohibits “promoting enmity between different groups on the basis of religion, race, place of birth, and other factors.” Section 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), Section 295A (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs), Section 500 (punishment for defamation), and Section 505(2) (Statement creating or promoting enmity, hatred, or ill-will between classes) of the Indian Penal Code 1860.
On February 23, Khera was picked up from the Delhi airport after he boarded a plane to Raipur, Chhattisgarh, for an All India Congress Committee (AICC) meeting.
Based on a first information report (FIR) filed against him, the Assam Police deplaned him and took him.
He had filed a petition with the Supreme Court, and the court granted him temporary protection and ordered that the three cases against him that had been filed in Assam and Uttar Pradesh should be combined and moved to Lucknow.
Under the watchful eye of the High Court, Senior Advocate JN Mathur, showing up for Khera, that’s what let the Court know albeit in the FIR. The complainant cited a number of provisions in the Assam registration, but the Investigating Officer only notified the petitioner under Sections 153-A, 153-B(1)/500/504/505(1)(b)/505(2) IPC
Although Khera’s Advocate acknowledged that Sections 295 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code had been removed from the scope of the investigation, it appears that the petitioner is not in immediate danger of arrest.
However, he stated that he was still seeking the quashing of the FIR because it was oppressive and the allegations in it did not offend
Regarding Khera’s plea, the Court sought responses from the private complainants as well as the State of Uttar Pradesh.
However, the Court made it clear that there is no need for an interim order in Khera’s favor because the top court has already extended Khera’s protection.
“”After reviewing the Supreme Court’s final order dated March 20, 2023, this Court finds that the Court had already provided the petitioner with interim protection and the option to apply,”Therefore, no interim order is required at this time,” the Court stated.
On May 4, the issue will be discussed once more
By:- Yuvraj Sachdeva, BA+LLB(2nd Semester), RNB Global University
0 Comments