Logo
Court Book - India Code App - Play Store

Loading Ad...

Cartoonist Hemant Malviya Moves Supreme Court for Anticipatory Bail Over Satirical Post on PM and RSS

Shivam Y.

Cartoonist Hemant Malviya has approached the Supreme Court seeking anticipatory bail after MP High Court denied relief in a case over a satirical cartoon involving PM Modi and the RSS.

Cartoonist Hemant Malviya Moves Supreme Court for Anticipatory Bail Over Satirical Post on PM and RSS

Cartoonist Hemant Malviya has filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court challenging a Madhya Pradesh High Court decision that denied him anticipatory bail. The case relates to a cartoon shared on Facebook in 2021, which allegedly mocked Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).

Read in Hindi

The plea was mentioned by Senior Advocate Vrinda Grover before a bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. She argued,

“The High Court order condemns me. It says Arnesh Kumar will not apply, 41-A will not apply, and Imran Pratapgarhi will also not apply.”

Read also:- Intelligence Officer Gets Bail in Kerala High Court in Alleged Suicide Abetment Case

She added that the cartoon was drawn during the COVID-19 pandemic and carries a maximum sentence of three years under the new Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

According to Malviya’s petition,

“A malicious FIR has been filed to punish the Petitioner for using his right to free speech, only because the content offended someone’s personal beliefs. But even a basic reading of the FIR shows that no offence has actually been committed.”

The cartoon in question, published on January 6, 2021, was a satirical take on a public figure's controversial statement comparing vaccine safety to water, despite a lack of clinical trials. The cartoon was widely circulated on social media for over four years.

Read also:- Delhi High Court Examines Jurisdiction in Mohak Mangal's Plea to Transfer ANI’s Copyright Case

The controversy reignited on May 1, 2025, when a third party reposted the cartoon with commentary linking it to the caste census and other political issues. Malviya re-shared the post, stating it was to show how his work was publicly available and not to endorse the added message.

Despite this, an FIR was filed on May 21, 2025, under Sections 196, 299, 302, 352, 353(2) of the BNSS, and Section 67(A) of the IT Act. The complaint alleged that the cartoon insulted the RSS, incited violence, and hurt religious sentiments. The complainant identified himself as an RSS member and a follower of the Hindu faith.

The Additional Sessions Judge, Indore rejected Malviya's anticipatory bail on May 24, 2025. His subsequent appeal to the Madhya Pradesh High Court was dismissed on July 3, 2025.

Read also:- Kerala High Court: Woman Entitled to Gold Given to In-Laws Without Needing Documentary Proof

The High Court held,

“The applicant has crossed the limits of free speech. The content of the cartoon and the use of religious references make custodial interrogation necessary.”

The court pointed out the cartoon portrayed the RSS in uniform being injected by a caricature of the Prime Minister, who was shown with a stethoscope and syringe. Additionally, derogatory remarks involving Lord Shiva were highlighted.

“The act was deliberate and intended to outrage religious feelings and disturb harmony,” the court observed, also noting a likelihood of repeat offence.

Read also:- Law Student’s Petition Over Ram Janmbhoomi Exam Question Dismissed by Rajasthan HC

Rejecting the application of Arnesh Kumar guidelines, the High Court held that Sections 41(1)(b)(i) and (ii) of CrPC applied and protections under Section 41A CrPC or Section 35 BNSS were not available to Malviya.

In his plea before the Supreme Court, Malviya argued that the charges are based on artistic expression and mere resharing of publicly available content.

“This FIR is nothing but an attempt to misuse the legal process to suppress dissent,” the petition claims.

It further states that none of the alleged offences attract punishment exceeding seven years, and hence, protection under the Imran Pratapgarhi and Arnesh Kumar judgments should apply.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the matter on Monday, July 14.

Case Title: Hemant Malviya v. State of Madhya Pradesh