Supreme Court pulls up Tripura Police for issuing Notice to Activists on posts related to Riots

Tripura Police whatsapp twitter speech Law Insider

Nishka Srinivas Veluvali

Published On: February 07, 2022 at 18:08 IST

The Supreme Court reprimanded the Tripura Police for Notice issued against the activists for the posts uploaded in the Public domain with regard to the communal Riots or violence despite the Interim Order passed by the Court.

The Court apprised the State Police that if they did not refute from harassing the people then they would Order for direct presence of the Superintendent of Police and even the State Home Secretary, if required.

The Bench of Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant were considering the Application filed by the social activist Samiullah Shabir Khan opposing the Notice issued by the State Police seeking his presence as per Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

Advocate Sharukh Alam representing the Applicant, submitted that the 10 January Interim Order passed by the Court refrained the police from taking any action against the Tweets posted by the applicant.

As per that Order, the Court had put Stay on the proceedings of the Notice issued by the police to the Twitter Inc as per Section 91 CrPC requesting removal of his tweets and any details with regard to his IP address and mobile number.

Alam also informed the Court that the physical service of this Order is incomplete and has not reached the Superintendent of Police. She further added that the Order received immense media attention but still the SP had issued the notice for his presence.

The State Counsel has sought that the matter be held over two weeks.

In response to this request, Justice Surya Kant asked, “What do you mean hold over two weeks when you have issued the Notice for today?”

Observing this the Bench passed an Order stating that no further action should be executed on the grounds of Section 41A notice issued to the Petitioner.

The Bench dictated, “Ms. Sharukh Alam, Advocate for the Petitioner, states that the Order dated 10 January 2022 passed by this Court, though reported widely, has formally remained to be served on the superintendent of police. Be that as it may, a Notice under section 41 A of the Cr. P. C. dated 20 January 2022 was issued in the name of the mother of the Petitioner (presumably because the house at the permanent address of the petitioner is in correspondence to the house which is in the name of his mother), requiring the attendance of the Petitioner today. Since the Petitioner has already been protected by the previous Order of this Court dated 10 January 2022, no further steps shall be taken in pursuance of the Notice under Section 41 A, pending further Orders. Mr Suvodip Roy, Counsel for the state of Tripura, shall communicate both the copies of the present Order and the previous Order dated 10 January 2022 to the superintendent of police”.

Upon receiving this Order, Alam submitted to the Court that the police had also issued the Notices against others over their social media posts.

The Bench fumed upon hearing this submission and stated that, “Inform your SP to not harass people like this. Why should everybody be required to run to the Supreme Court? Show some deference to the Orders passed by the Court. Otherwise, we will call the SP to us if he trying to evade complying with the Order by issuing all these kinds of notices to others! We will ask all to remain present even the Home Secretary! There is no way”.

Related Post