“Interestingly, the person, who was allegedly intentionally insulted by the petitioner, thereby being provoked to breach the public peace or commit any other offence, never came forward to lodge a complaint…” These words from Justice Sandeep Sharma of the Himachal Pradesh High Court encapsulate the essence of a recent ruling that has drawn significant attention.

On April 4, 2026, the High Court quashed an FIR against Thakar Singh Bharmouri, who faced allegations of making derogatory remarks about Prime Minister Narendra Modi during an election rally on October 3, 2021. The FIR was initiated following an email complaint from a member of the Bharatiya Janta Party, but notably, Prime Minister Modi himself did not file any complaint.

Justice Sharma’s ruling underscored the legal principle that vague accusations do not constitute a criminal offense without specific descriptions of the language used. He stated, “No material worth credence has been adduced on record to suggest that petitioner intentionally, with a view to cause public disruption, hurled abuses and made uncalled for remarks against the Hon’ble Prime Minister.” This statement reflects a critical examination of the evidence presented in the case.

Furthermore, the court highlighted that to invoke Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace, the essential elements must be present. Justice Sharma noted that the main ingredient to invoke this section was missing in Bharmouri’s case.

In his analysis, Justice Sharma remarked, “…there is no allegation that while using absurd language and hurling abuses at the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India, petitioner ever attempted to promote enmity or hatred between different classes of citizens of India on the grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language…” This observation points to the court’s commitment to uphold the standards of evidence required in such serious allegations.

The ruling also emphasized the necessity of specific grounds to invoke Section 125 of the Representation of the People Act, which governs electoral conduct. The court observed that there was no evidence of promoting enmity or hatred between different classes of citizens, further solidifying its stance on the matter.

Ultimately, the court’s decision led to Bharmouri’s formal acquittal of the charges after the FIR was quashed. Justice Sharma concluded by asserting, “The High Court’s inherent power under Section 528 must be exercised to prevent the judicial process from being used as a weapon of harassment in cases where a conviction is highly unlikely.” This ruling not only reflects the judiciary’s role in protecting individual rights but also serves as a reminder of the importance of substantiated claims in legal proceedings.

The post Sandeep sharma: Justice ‘s Insightful Ruling on Thakar Singh Bharmouri’s Case appeared first on 4tvnews.