The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea filed by advocate and social activist Rajat Kalsan, who sought to quash an FIR accusing him of making inflammatory remarks during a public gathering related to a 2024 murder-rape case in Haryana. Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj held that the allegations in the FIR disclose a prima facie offence and therefore cannot be quashed at this stage.
Background of the Case
The FIR stems from a video posted on Facebook on 14 July 2025, where Kalsan allegedly spoke at a gathering outside the Hisar Mini Secretariat concerning the murder of Krishna Devi in Budhana, Hansi. According to the complainant, the speech projected the accused as innocent and made serious allegations against villagers, police officers, and specific caste groups.
Read also:- Patna High Court Orders NIOS to Correct Student’s Marksheet After Record Error
The FIR includes offences under Sections 196(1), 352, 353(1)(2), 356(2), 49 & 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Kalsan argued that the speech was part of his professional duty as counsel for an accused woman in the murder case and claimed that his right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a) had been violated.
Court’s Observations
The Court focused on the context of the speech its timing, audience, and location and said free speech is not absolute when it risks inciting disharmony.
“Public speeches cannot be examined in isolation. The place, audience and prevailing circumstances determine their impact.” -Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj
The Court noted that Kalsan repeatedly used terms such as “casteist gundas/jaati vaadi”, which, according to the judge, could not be dismissed as casual language and carried the potential to inflame divisions.
“The persistent reference to caste shows a deliberate attempt… with the potential to disturb public tranquility.” -High Court observation
It added that an advocate’s role is to defend inside the courtroom, not mobilise crowds in a public protest:
“An advocate cannot defend a case on the streets by arranging public mobilisation.” - Court remark
Why the FIR Stands (At This Stage)
The Court held that FIRs can only be quashed when allegations clearly fail to make out an offence. Here, however, the speech, setting, and allegations collectively justified investigation.
- Speech targeted specific groups
- Public setting with high emotional stakes
- Potential to create disharmony
- Statements uploaded online for wider impact
“Once primary ingredients of the offences are disclosed, motive of the complainant becomes irrelevant.” - Court on refusal to quash
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the petition and refused to quash the FIR, holding that the matter requires investigation and evidence evaluation at trial.
Case Title:- Rajat Kalsan vs. State of Haryana & Others
Case Number:- CRM-M-53576-2025 (O&M)
