The Himachal Pradesh High Court, in a detailed judgment dated 22nd July 2025, granted regular bail to Farooq Ahmad, who was arrested on 9 May 2025 for allegedly sharing Facebook videos that were critical of the Prime Minister of India and the Indian Army. The arrest was made under Sections 152, 196, and 197 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), which relate to sedition, promoting enmity, and assertions against national integration.
The single-judge bench of Justice Rakesh Kainthla observed that mere sharing of videos, even if in bad taste, does not constitute incitement to violence or public disorder.
“They may be in bad taste, but they do not tend to incite any person to violence or create disturbance in public peace,”
— Justice Rakesh Kainthla
Read also:- One Stop Centres Failing Women and Children: Delhi HC Issues Strict Orders
Case Background
The FIR, registered on 9 May 2024, accused Farooq Ahmad of spreading anti-national, anti-Army, anti-Hindu, and anti-Prime Minister content. The complaint pointed to multiple videos, including:
- A clip featuring a Pakistani national making derogatory comments about the Prime Minister of India.
- A broadcast from a Pakistani news channel allegedly containing insulting remarks against the Indian Army.
During the investigation, the police seized Ahmad's mobile phone, traced the Facebook activity to his account, and sent the device for forensic analysis. However, Meta (Facebook’s parent company) refused to retrieve the data, complicating the investigation.
Read also:- Supreme Court Petition Seeks POSH Act Implementation for Political Parties
The prosecution also highlighted Ahmad’s prior convictions and pending FIRs to oppose the bail plea. However, the court found this insufficient without a prima facie case.
The High Court reviewed the videos and emphasized that:
“There is no averment in the status report that any person, including the informant, was incited to resort to violence.”
The court held that the content, while possibly offensive, did not meet the legal threshold to attract penal provisions under Sections 152 and 196 BNS (equivalent to Sections 124A and 153A of IPC). It relied on various Supreme Court rulings including:
- Vinod Dua v. Union of India (2021 SCC OnLine SC 414)
- Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab (1995)
- Manzar Sayeed Khan v. State of Maharashtra (2007)
Read also:- 7/11 Mumbai Blasts Case: Supreme Court Stays Bombay High Court's Acquittal but No Return to Jail for Accused
These judgments clarify that criticism alone, without intent to incite violence, does not amount to sedition or promoting enmity.
“The intention to cause disorder or incite people to violence is the sine qua non of the offence under Section 153-A IPC,”
— SC in Manzar Sayeed Khan Case
Furthermore, the High Court noted that prosecution sanction under Section 217 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita was still pending. The court ruled that keeping the petitioner in custody indefinitely in such a scenario would not serve justice.
Bail Granted With Conditions
The court approved bail on the condition that Ahmad:
- Does not influence witnesses or tamper with evidence.
- Attends all court hearings without unnecessary delays.
- Surrenders his passport and shares contact information with police.
- Remains traceable and informs authorities before any extended travel.
Read also:- Patna High Court Protects Flat Owners: Quashes State's Order Cancelling 50-Year Land Lease
The bail bond was fixed at ₹1,00,000/- with one surety.
“The criminal antecedents would have assumed significance if a prima facie case had been made out,”
— Justice Rakesh Kainthla
The court clarified that this bail order does not impact the trial's merits, and violation of bail conditions can lead to its cancellation.
Case Name: Farooq Ahmad vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Case Number: Cr. MP (M) No. 1473 of 2025
Judgment Date: 22 July 2025
Petitioner Counsel: Mr. Yashveer Singh Rathore
State Counsel: Mr. Lokender Kutlehria (AAG)