A Delhi court has directed the police to investigate journalist Rana Ayyub’s posts on social media platform X that allegedly insult Hindu deities and Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, sparking allegations of outraging religious sentiments. The order was issued in the case Mrs. Amita Sachdeva vs. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Chief Judicial Magistrate Himanshu Raman Singh of Saket Court instructed the Cyber Police Station, South, to register a First Information Report (FIR) based on a complaint by lawyer Amita Sachdeva.
“In view of the facts and circumstances, the complaint discloses commission of cognizable offences for which an FIR is warranted. Present SHO Cyber Police Station, South is directed convert the contents of complaint as FIR and investigate the matter fairly,” the court ordered.
The court observed that prima facie offences under Sections 153A (promoting enmity between groups), 295A (deliberate insult to religious sentiments), and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were made out, warranting police action.
In her complaint, Sachdeva stated that Ayyub’s tweets insulted Hindu deities, demeaned Hindu beliefs, mocked Bharat, and promoted communal discord. Sachdeva initially approached the Cyber Cell of the Delhi Police, citing Section 66A of the Information Technology Act.
The complaint stated that Ayyub’s posts revealed “an agenda to systematically mock and demean Hindu beliefs, insult India, and spread communal discord.”
Sachdeva claimed she had to approach the Magistrate’s Court due to the police’s failure to act. The Cyber Cell’s Action Taken Report (ATR) noted that no cognizable offence could be made out under Section 66A of the IT Act, as the provision was struck down by the Supreme Court in the Shreya Singhal judgment.
However, the court emphasized the seriousness of the allegations, stating, “Considering the gravity of the allegations, the Court is of the view that it is expedient to order investigation in the present matter in exercise of the judicial power under Section 156(3) CrPC.”
The matter will be considered further for compliance with the court’s order.
