SC asks Goa’s standing counsel to apologise for tweet on Bihar migrants in Tamil Nadu | India News
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked BJP leader and standing counsel of Goa Prashant Kumar Umrao to tender unconditional apology for tweeting that migrant labourers from Bihar were being hanged in Tamil Nadu while allowing his plea modifying stringent conditions imposed by Madras high court for granting him anticipatory bail and told him to be more responsible.
The high court while granting him anticipatory bail on March 21 directed him to appear before the state police twice in a day at 10.30am in morning and at 5.30pm in the evening.
The lawyer, who is also spokesperson of the BJP, thereafter moved the apex court seeking modification in the conditions. Umrao has been accused of uploading false content on his Twitter intentionally to trigger linguistic chauvinism, instigating violence between Hindi-speaking Bihar people and other State people versus Tamil people.
Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for him, told a bench of Justices B R Gavai and Pankaj Mithal that multiple FIRs have been filed against him on behalf of individuals and political workers and pleaded protection in all cases.
“I will become like an animal in the ring and would go round and round and would not be able to come out with as many FIRs filed in the case. Luthra admitted that it was wrong on his part to tweet and his client immediately deleted it after realising the mistake.
Understanding the gravity of the offence of tweeting fake news, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi and additional advocate general of Tamil Nadu Amit Anand Tiwari, submitted that such behaviour was not expected from a member of Bar and said such tweets created riots in the past.
Giving an example of himself, Tiwari, who was appointed by the state as its additional advocate general despite belonging to a Hindi speaking belt, said that the BJP leader should have thought about him before tweeting to understand that there was no discrimination in the state on the basis of region and language.
The court, after a brief hearing, passed the order and observed that the lawyer should act more responsibly. It said that the HC order to grant him anticipatory bail would be applicable to other cases also which were lodged on the basis of his tweet.
“The condition under Clause (b) mentioned in paragraph 14 of the impugned judgment and order which requires the petitioner to report before the respondent Police, daily at 10.30am and 5.30pm for a period of 15 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation is modified to the extent that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on April 10 initially at 10am and thereafter as and when called upon to do so by the Investigating Officer,” the bench said .
The court also agreed to hear his plea for clubbing of all FIR and said, “By way of an ad interim order, we direct that the anticipatory bail which is granted by the learned single Judge of the High Court and thereafter modified by us, would be also applicable to any other FIR registered in the State of Tamil Nadu with regard to the same cause of action”.
The leader in his petition submitted that the high court has exceeded its jurisdiction in imposing arbitrary conditions which are highly onerous and unreasonable. “It is submitted that from the perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the Court has exceeded its jurisdiction in imposing such arbitrary conditions which are highly onerous and unreasonable,” the plea read.
The high court while granting him anticipatory bail on March 21 directed him to appear before the state police twice in a day at 10.30am in morning and at 5.30pm in the evening.
The lawyer, who is also spokesperson of the BJP, thereafter moved the apex court seeking modification in the conditions. Umrao has been accused of uploading false content on his Twitter intentionally to trigger linguistic chauvinism, instigating violence between Hindi-speaking Bihar people and other State people versus Tamil people.
Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for him, told a bench of Justices B R Gavai and Pankaj Mithal that multiple FIRs have been filed against him on behalf of individuals and political workers and pleaded protection in all cases.
“I will become like an animal in the ring and would go round and round and would not be able to come out with as many FIRs filed in the case. Luthra admitted that it was wrong on his part to tweet and his client immediately deleted it after realising the mistake.
Understanding the gravity of the offence of tweeting fake news, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi and additional advocate general of Tamil Nadu Amit Anand Tiwari, submitted that such behaviour was not expected from a member of Bar and said such tweets created riots in the past.
Giving an example of himself, Tiwari, who was appointed by the state as its additional advocate general despite belonging to a Hindi speaking belt, said that the BJP leader should have thought about him before tweeting to understand that there was no discrimination in the state on the basis of region and language.
The court, after a brief hearing, passed the order and observed that the lawyer should act more responsibly. It said that the HC order to grant him anticipatory bail would be applicable to other cases also which were lodged on the basis of his tweet.
“The condition under Clause (b) mentioned in paragraph 14 of the impugned judgment and order which requires the petitioner to report before the respondent Police, daily at 10.30am and 5.30pm for a period of 15 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation is modified to the extent that the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on April 10 initially at 10am and thereafter as and when called upon to do so by the Investigating Officer,” the bench said .
The court also agreed to hear his plea for clubbing of all FIR and said, “By way of an ad interim order, we direct that the anticipatory bail which is granted by the learned single Judge of the High Court and thereafter modified by us, would be also applicable to any other FIR registered in the State of Tamil Nadu with regard to the same cause of action”.
The leader in his petition submitted that the high court has exceeded its jurisdiction in imposing arbitrary conditions which are highly onerous and unreasonable. “It is submitted that from the perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the Court has exceeded its jurisdiction in imposing such arbitrary conditions which are highly onerous and unreasonable,” the plea read.
