A few weeks ago, in October, the Supreme Court refused to quash a FIR, registered by the Uttar Pradesh (UP) police, against the folk singer Neha Rathore. Rathore had published various tweets in the aftermath of the Pahalgam attack. Following this, the UP police booked her for various offences, including “endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India”, for these allegedly “provocative” posts. Rathore first approached the high court, which denied her relief, and then the Supreme Court, which also denied her relief.

This case marks the latest instance in a disturbing trend of the higher judiciary failing to protect citizens from the abuse of State power, simply for exercising their constitutionally guaranteed rights.

In all these cases, judges appear to be more concerned about hectoring citizens for what they have said, written, or tweeted online, rather than performing their core function of enforcing the law and the Constitution.

As far as the law goes, the position is quite clear. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees to all citizens the right to freedom of expression. This right can only be restricted by a law, which imposes a “reasonable restriction” in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, public order, decency or........

© hindustantimes