The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a writ petition filed by Karnataka-based rebel BJP worker Gurudath Shetty Karkala, seeking to quash an FIR registered by Gujarat Police over social media posts abusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The court also rejected a request for an interim relief for a week to apply for bail.
Even though Shetty is a BJP worker, he belongs to the camp of rebel BJP leader Subramanyam Swamy. He regularly posts comments on social media criticising and mocking BJP and the Modi government.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi, dismissed the petition observing that the petitioner had “brazenly abused” the fundamental right to freedom of expression and speech. The Court noted a lack of remorse on the petitioner’s part, adding that the offending post was not even annexed to the plea, likely due to absence of repentance.
“You have not annexed it because you have no sense of repentance. You do not have any remorse for what you have done. You do not have even a kind word for those persons whom you are abusing,” the CJI remarked during the hearing.
The case stems from a post on X (formerly Twitter) by a parody account titled “Jawaharlal Nehru Satire”. Shetty claimed he had merely reposted the content posted by the account with a question mark and did not author it. The parody account @The_Nehru with a blue tick is withheld in India. This account regularly posts comments mocking and abusing the Modi government, and ‘BJP worker’ Gurudath Shetty regularly retweets them.
The FIR, invoking bailable offences under Sections 336(4) and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), was registered following allegations that the post was intended to defame the Prime Minister.
Shetty, a resident of Bengaluru, also alleged procedural irregularities, including an incident on November 10 where Ahmedabad police reportedly reached his home without a warrant, detained him briefly, and served a notice under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
His counsel sought interim protection, arguing the offences were bailable and requesting 5-7 days to approach the Gujarat High Court. However, the Bench declined, stating: “There is no question of protection.” The Court clarified that Shetty is at liberty to seek remedies before the appropriate High Court.
