New Delhi : The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to entertain a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR registered by the Gujarat Police against Gurudath Shetty K of Bengaluru over a social media post allegedly targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi on X, formerly Twitter.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul Pancholi observed that the case was not fit for the exercise of the Court’s discretionary jurisdiction. The Bench remarked that the petitioner had “brazenly abused the pristine fundamental right of free expression and speech,” making it clear that such conduct does not merit relief under Article 32.
Shetty, who claimed to be a BJP worker, had challenged the FIR lodged under Sections 336(4) and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. He argued that the FIR and related police communications were illegal, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional safeguards. His counsel submitted that the petitioner had not authored the impugned post but had merely reposted it with a question mark, and sought interim protection to allow him to approach the jurisdictional High Court.
The Chief Justice questioned the absence of remorse and noted that the allegedly offensive post was not even annexed to the petition. The Bench held that it could not extend any discretion or interim relief, reiterating that the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression cannot be misused to lower the quality of public discourse or to target the highest constitutional office without justification.
Dismissing the petition, the Supreme Court clarified that Shetty remains free to seek appropriate relief before the concerned High Court in accordance with law.
According to the FIR, the complainant alleged that the social media content was intended to tarnish the reputation of the Prime Minister. Shetty also contended that the Ahmedabad Police had visited his residence without a warrant and issued a notice under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, directing him to appear before the investigating officer. He claimed that he was taken to Gujarat by the police, released thereafter, and subsequently served with the notice.
The Court’s refusal to interfere at the threshold stage is consistent with recent judicial approach, where courts have generally declined to quash FIRs relating to controversial social media content against public figures, holding that prima facie cognizable offences warrant investigation.
Case Details:
Case Name: Gurudath Shetty K v. State of Gujarat
Petitioner: Gurudath Shetty K, Bengaluru
Respondent: State of Gujarat (Gujarat Police)
Writ Petition (Criminal) No.: 515 of 2025
Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Justice Vipul Pancholi
Advocate for Petitioner: Rashi Jindal, AOR
Statutes Invoked: Sections 336(4) and 79, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
