Allahabad High Court grants interim protection to man who said that CM Yogi Adityanath has 'thick skin' during protests against Hathras gang-rape

The Allahabad High Court recently granted interim protection from arrest to a man who said during a protest that Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath was "a man of thick skin” (Neeraj Kishor Mishra v. State of Uttar Pradesh).

A Bench of Justices Anjani Kumar Mishra and Shekhar Kumar Yadav granted protection to Neeraj Kishor Mishra, against whom a First Information Report (FIR) was registered for offences under Section 153-B(2) (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration) and 505(2) (statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code.

It was alleged that Mishra had said during a protest related to the Hathras gang-rape that the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh was a man of ‘thick skin’. It was also alleged in the FIR that the "Balmiki Samaj" (Valmiki caste), to which the Hathras victim belonged to, created disturbance by carrying out a protest in which speeches were made alleging inaction on the part of the police.

Counsel for the petitioner had submitted before the Court that in a democratic country, agitation is a Constitution right, and therefore, agitation of the petitioner on the issue of rape of a girl of the "Balmiki Samaj" cannot be termed as inciting hatred or ill-will between different religions or races. Thus, no offence under Section 153-B(2) or Section 505(2) IPC was made out.

After hearing the arguments, the Bench concluded that the matter requires consideration. It thus went on to grant interim protection from arrest to the petitioner. The order reads,

“Till the next date of listing or till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., whichever is earlier, the petitioner shall not be arrested in impugned first information report dated 11.12.2020 registered as Case Crime No.368 of 2020, under Sections 153-B (2), 505 (2) I.P.C., Police Station Patiyali, District Kasganj, subject to petitioner's co-operation in the investigation.”

The Bench granted four weeks' time to the respondents to file counter affidavit, and a period of two weeks thereafter for the petitioner to file rejoinder affidavit. The matter will be listed after six weeks.

It was also made clear that the investigation into the case would not be stayed in the meantime.

Senior Advocate VP Srivastava represented the petitioner.

[Read Order]