Moral policing not court’s job, says SC, sets aside HC cost for tweets | India News

NEW DELHI: Observing that it is not the court’s function to do moral policing, Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside a Punjab and Haryana high court order directing musician Vishal Dadlani and politician Tehseen Poonawalla to pay the cost of Rs 10 lakh for their tweets mocking a Jain monk.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan asked how the high court could impose cost on the duo for their social media comments after holding that no criminal offence was made out by their posts. The HC had in 2019 quashed the FIR registered against them by holding that no offence under Sections 153A, 295A, 509 of the IPC was made out from the complaint but said that it would be appropriate to impose the costs of Rs 10 lakh each so that in future they may not mock a religious sect head just to gain publicity on social media.
Quashing HC’s order, the SC bench said, “We are of the view that after finding that absolutely no offence was made out when exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC, high court ought not to have exercised advisory jurisdiction by telling the appellant that the contribution made by the priest was much more than what the appellant and the other accused have contributed. Function of the court is not to do moral policing”.
“Perusal of the impugned judgment shows that the high court upheld the fundamental right of the appellant of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. After holding that no offence was made out against the appellant there was no question of imposing cost on the appellant and other petitioner,” it said.