Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Case Over Facebook Post Against Prophet Muhammad
Court says unsigned plea cannot override evidence of malicious intent in hurting religious feelings
Justice Saurabh Srivastava rules that such cases must face trial, not dismissal at summoning stage
By Our Legal Reporter
New Delhi: December 13, 2025:
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against a man accused of making a Facebook post against Prophet Muhammad. The court observed that the words used in the post were clearly intended to outrage religious feelings and therefore warranted trial. The decision underscores the judiciary’s stance on protecting religious sentiments in India’s diverse society.
Also Read: Supreme Court Rules: Criminal Complaints Cannot Continue If Case Already Settled Abroad
Background of the Case
- The accused, Manish Tiwari, allegedly made a Facebook post containing derogatory remarks against Prophet Muhammad.
- Following complaints from members of the Muslim community, police registered a case under relevant provisions of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
- A charge sheet was filed, and the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) of Sonbhadra took cognizance of the offence, issuing a summoning order in July 2025.
- The accused filed a petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking dismissal of the case, arguing that the post did not warrant criminal proceedings.
Court’s Observations
Justice Saurabh Srivastava dismissed the plea, noting:
- The words used in the Facebook post were deliberate and malicious, aimed at outraging religious feelings.
- The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) must be exercised sparingly.
- At the stage of summoning, the High Court is not expected to conduct a “mini trial” or examine the defence of the accused.
- The trial court is the appropriate forum to determine guilt or innocence.
The ruling makes it clear that freedom of expression cannot be misused to insult religious figures or communities.
Legal Framework
- Section 353(2) of BNS: Deals with deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings.
- Section 528 BNSS: Grants inherent powers to High Courts to quash proceedings, but only in exceptional cases.
- The court emphasized that these powers cannot be used to shield accused persons from trial when prima facie evidence exists.
Impact on Society
This ruling has broader implications:
Also Read: ITAT Hyderabad Rules Severance Pay is Taxable: How Employees Can Avoid Costly Tax Mistakes
- For social media users: It serves as a reminder that online posts carry legal consequences.
- For communities: It reassures that the judiciary takes religious sentiments seriously.
- For law enforcement: It strengthens the authority of police and magistrates to act against offensive content.
The case highlights the growing intersection of digital platforms and criminal law, where online speech can lead to real-world legal battles.
Expert Opinions
Legal experts note that the ruling reinforces the principle that hate speech and derogatory remarks against religious figures are not protected under free speech.
- Advocates argue that the decision will deter individuals from posting inflammatory content online.
- Academics suggest that the case underscores the need for greater awareness about cyber laws and responsible digital behaviour.
Similar Cases
- In past rulings, courts have consistently held that derogatory remarks against religious figures or communities’ amount to criminal offences.
- The Supreme Court has also emphasized that freedom of speech is subject to reasonable restrictions, especially when it comes to maintaining public order and respecting religious sentiments.
Broader Implications
The Allahabad High Court’s decision reflects India’s legal approach to balancing freedom of expression with respect for religious diversity.
- It signals to citizens that social media posts are not beyond the reach of law.
- It also highlights the judiciary’s role in preventing misuse of digital platforms for spreading hate.
For policymakers, the case underscores the importance of strengthening cyber laws and promoting digital literacy to prevent similar incidents.
Conclusion
The Allahabad High Court’s refusal to quash proceedings against Manish Tiwari is a landmark ruling in the context of online speech and religious sensitivity. By holding that derogatory Facebook posts aimed at Prophet Muhammad must face trial, the court has reinforced the principle that malicious intent to hurt religious sentiments cannot be ignored.
Also Read: ITAT Clarifies: Capital Loss Can Be Set Off Against Capital Gain Despite Different Tax Rates
For citizens, the message is clear: exercise caution and responsibility in online expression. Freedom of speech is a fundamental right, but it comes with duties and restrictions.
Suggested Keywords for SEO (Google + ChatGPT)
- Allahabad High Court Facebook post case
- Prophet Muhammad derogatory post India
- BNSS Section 528 quash plea ruling
- Outraging religious feelings law India
- Social media hate speech India
- ITAT Allahabad religious sentiments case
- Manish Tiwari Facebook post case
- Cyber law religious offence India
- Freedom of speech vs religious sensitivity
- High Court ruling on online hate speech
Also Read: ITAT Ruling: No Section 69C Additions on Property Deals Based on Unsigned Draft Agreements