New Delhi: Using social media to falsely project a public figure as a sexual predator involved in a heinous murder deserved a probe, held the Uttarakhand High Court on 3 June. The court said this while addressing a batch of petitions filed by ex-BJP MLA Suresh Rathore, seeking to quash four separate FIRs filed against him, which alleged a “well-planned organised conspiracy” to malign political rivals by using vulgar social media content and falsely linking them to the high-profile Ankita Bhandari murder case. The court quashed 2 FIRs, upheld two.
In May 2025, a Kotdwar court in Uttarakhand sentenced the main accused, Pulkit Arya (son of expelled BJP leader Vinod Arya), alongside his resort staff to rigorous life imprisonment for the 2022 murder of 19-year-old receptionist Ankita Bhandari. While the witness statements and charge sheets mentioned an attempt to rape, there was no conviction for it.
While ex-BJP MLA Suresh Rathore was not an accused in the 2022 murder itself, he became embroiled in the case after an actress, Urmila Sanawar—who claims to be his wife—allegedly leaked recordings that exposed the ‘identity’ of a “VIP guest” linked to the crime.
The current legal battle stems from a series of audio and video clips uploaded on Facebook and Instagram. The complainants, including BJP national general secretary Dushyant Kumar Gautam, alleged that Rathore and co-accused Urmila Sanavar circulated fabricated content using “extremely vulgar and abusive language”.
Crucially, Dushyant Kumar Gautam and Arti Gaur (another petitioner) claimed these videos were designed to portray Gautam as a “sexual predator” and the “VIP” allegedly involved in the case. The court noted that these actions appeared to be aimed at gaining “political mileage” by creating a false narrative in the public domain.
Court’s ruling on successive FIRs
Justice Rakesh Thapliyal partially allowed Rathore’s petitions by quashing two of the four FIRs registered in Haridwar, finding that these two FIRs contained identical allegations to the one filed by the actual complainant Gautam.
Citing the Supreme Court precedent in 2001’s T. T. Antony vs. State of Kerala, the court ruled that “there can be no second FIR” for the same cognisable offence or incident. Furthermore, the court observed that the informants in these two quashed cases were neither the victims nor the affected parties, thus lacking the locus standi to maintain separate proceedings.
However, the high court refused to quash the primary FIR filed by Gautam and another filed by Arti Gaur emphasising that these FIRs disclose “prima facie cognisable offences” that require a thorough investigation. Using sharp language regarding the potential political nature of the case, the judge stated that the attempt to implicate a person in a heinous crime for “ulterior purpose and motive” or “political gain” must be investigated. “This may be politically motivated or may be a well planned organised conspiracy by the petitioner… at the instance of some persons who are associated with some political parties,” said the order.
“Projecting a person to be involved in a heinous crime (portrayed as a sexual predator) with an ulterior purpose and motive, may be for a political gain, is required to be investigated. No one has a right to malign the image of a person by uploading messages and videos in the social media,” read the order.
The judge noted that while social media can highlight public issues, it is not a tool to malign individuals and because the investigation involves digital devices, forensic analysis of voice samples, and the identification of coordinated circulation, interference at this stage would be improper.
Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petitions related to the primary FIRs and vacated the interim protection previously granted to the ex-MLA. The court concluded that whether a “political agenda” exists behind the uploaded conversations is a matter that can only be settled through a “thorough investigation”.
(Edited by Viny Mishra)
Also read: In Uttarakhand, ‘cosmetic gestures’ fan anger over Ankita Bhandari murder case amid renewed protests