SUPREME COURT ISSUES NOTICE TO MADHYA PRADESH POLICE ON PLEA TO QUASH FIR OVER WHATSAPP MESSAGE CLAIMING BEEF CONSUMPTION ESSENTIAL FOR BEING A ‘GOOD HINDU’:

The Supreme Court of India has agreed to examine a plea seeking the quashing of a First Information Report (FIR) registered against a man accused of circulating a WhatsApp message that described beef consumption as essential to being a “good Hindu.” A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan issued notice to the Madhya Pradesh Police and other concerned parties on the petition filed by Buddha Prakash Bouddha. The petitioner approached the apex court after the Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to interfere with the FIR and dismissed his application for its quashing.

The High Court, in its earlier order, had observed that the contents of the FIR, when accepted at face value, prima facie revealed the essential elements of the offences alleged against the petitioner. It noted that the case involved accusations of disseminating material capable of wounding religious sentiments or fostering enmity and disharmony among different groups. The court had concluded that the allegations, as set out in the FIR, sufficiently indicated the commission of the invoked offences, thereby justifying the continuation of the criminal proceedings.

According to the police complaint, Buddha Prakash Bouddha shared a seven-page message on WhatsApp that contained statements described as derogatory and misleading about Hinduism and the Brahmin community. The message reportedly asserted that consuming beef was a necessary practice for someone to qualify as a good Hindu. It further claimed that bull sacrifices and the consumption of bovine meat were obligatory during certain religious occasions. The content also alleged that Brahmins historically and regularly ate cow and bull meat, and that cows and bulls were slaughtered as part of various Hindu religious ceremonies. These assertions were said to have been made in a manner that could provoke outrage among followers of the Hindu faith and disturb communal harmony.

Based on the complaint, an FIR was registered against Bouddha under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The sections invoked include 196(1)(b), which pertains to promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, or community; 299, which deals with deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings by insulting a religion or its beliefs; and 353(1)(c) and 353(2), which relate to statements conducing to public mischief through the spread of false information or provocative assertions likely to cause fear, alarm, or incite disturbances.

The petitioner has challenged the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision not to quash the FIR, arguing that the message in question was an expression of personal or historical views and did not warrant criminal prosecution. By issuing notice, the Supreme Court has now invited responses from the state police and other respondents, setting the stage for a detailed consideration of whether the registration and continuation of the FIR constitute an abuse of process or infringe upon the petitioner’s fundamental rights, particularly those relating to freedom of speech and expression. The matter will proceed after the respondents file their replies, allowing the apex court to assess the balance between protecting religious sentiments and safeguarding individual liberties in the context of online communications.

This development highlights the ongoing judicial scrutiny of cases involving social media messages that touch upon religious practices and historical claims, especially when they are alleged to offend community feelings or provoke disharmony. The Supreme Court’s decision to admit the plea underscores the importance of examining whether such prosecutions meet the threshold of criminality or risk chilling legitimate discourse on cultural and religious matters.