Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
A single-judge bench of the Meghalaya High Court vide judgment dated November 10, 2020, has dismissed the petition moved by Meghalaya journalist Patricia Mukhim thereby denying to quash the criminal case registered against her for posting a controversial comment on Facebook. The impugned post by the senior journalist and Editor of Shillong Times, Ms. Mukhim, referred to an alleged incident that occurred on July 3, 2020, at a basketball court in Lawsohtun, Shillong wherein some boys playing basketball were attacked by unidentified youths.
A journalist of international repute, Ms. Mukhim had in the said post, raised her concerns regarding the increasing unwarranted attacks on non – tribal people by the tribal population in the state. She claimed that due to the non – detainment of “trouble mongers” since 1979, the state of Meghalaya was reduced to a “failed state” in ensuring social justice for its people.
The said comment by the journalist had provoked a village council in Meghalaya to initiate criminal proceedings against her on July 7, 2020. Consequently, the police had charged Ms. Mukhim under Sections 153A, 500 as well as 505 C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 which provides punishment for involvement in attacks against a distinct group of people on the basis of inter alia their religion and race, punishment for defamation and punishment for public mischief with intents to cause opposition between different communities respectively. Furthermore, Ms. Mukhim was also summoned to appear before the investigating officer by the issuance of notice under Section 41 A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
In her petition to the High Court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 to absolve the case against her, Ms. Mukhim pleaded that her comments were solely directed towards the better handling of the case by the law enforcement agency and that the same was in the interest of the general public without there being any ulterior motives or malafide intentions. The Petition claimed that there existed no guilty intention or men's rea and hence the charges against the petitioner did not stand.
The High court, rejecting the petition, held that Ms. Mukhim’s comments were in fact aimed at disrupting the harmonious relations existing between the tribal and non-tribal population of Meghalaya.
86540
103860
630
114
59824