When Advocacy Meets Accountability: The Manipur Social Media Case.
23 September 2024
Investigation >> Criminal Law
Following the incident, criminal proceedings were initiated due to the remarks deemed harmful to the reputation of government authorities. The situation escalated to the point where the petitioner’s arrest was stayed by the court on October 18, 2023, alongside a directive to halt any further legal actions stemming from her posts. By February 26, 2024, the petitioner had joined the investigation as instructed.
During the proceedings, the petitioner’s Senior Counsel expressed regret on her behalf, emphasizing that there was no intention to damage the reputation of any government entity. The remarks were merely an attempt to advocate for better representation of trans-women within the board. The counsel also conveyed the petitioner’s commitment to refrain from making similar comments in the future and to address any grievances through appropriate channels.
The court, recognizing the petitioner's sincerity and the Advocate General's willingness to overlook this one-time error, decided to quash the notice issued under Section 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This gesture underscored a collaborative approach to resolving conflicts between free speech and accountability. The case serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between expressing one's views and the potential repercussions of such expressions in the digital age. The court’s decision to dispose of the writ petition amicably highlights the importance of constructive dialogue and understanding in addressing grievances, particularly within marginalized communities.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973