New Delhi: The Supreme Court Tuesday protected suspended BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma from arrest in all FIRs lodged against her over her allegedly blasphemous remarks on Prophet Mohammad, made during a television news debate on 25 May.
A bench of justices Surya Kant and J.B. Pardiwala — which had on 1 July refused Sharma relief — said no coercive action will be taken against her in case a fresh FIR or complaint is lodged against her.
The court granted the interim protection on Sharma’s application, which had sought permission to revive her earlier petition that asked the court to club all the FIRs pending against her with regard to controversial statements. The top court had on 1 July asked the former BJP spokesperson to approach respective high courts to quash the FIRs.
Sharma’s lawyer, senior advocate Maninder Singh, drew the court’s attention to subsequent developments after the 1 July order and submitted she had received death threats, due to which she was not in a position to avail the remedy of moving individual high courts, as earlier directed by the apex court.
Taking note of the submissions, the court observed that its primary concern was to ensure protection for Sharma, so that she can avail remedies under the law. It went on to issue notices to the Centre and states, including West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Delhi, where the FIRs are registered.
In her earlier petition as well as her latest application, Sharma has requested the top court to transfer all the FIRs to Delhi. During the arguments Tuesday, her counsel said she will take appropriate legal measures before the Delhi High Court (HC) to quash the FIRs.
The top court will hear the matter again on 10 August. “Our main concern is you were relegated (on 1 July) to avail the alternative remedy (of approaching high courts). You have pointed out in the application the subsequent unfortunate incidents. These incidents are causing serious impediments in availing the alternative remedy. Our concern, now, is to evolve those modalities to ensure you are not deprived of your right to avail the legal remedy,” Justice Surya Kant observed.
He further said that the court will, on 10 August, hear the other side and decide on Sharma’s request to move the cases to Delhi so she can invoke the Delhi HC’s jurisdiction for further legal processes.
Also Read: ‘I support Nupur Sharma’ — how a single WhatsApp forward ‘led to Amravati chemist’s murder’
‘Ever increasing, genuine threats to life’, says Sharma’s lawyer
In her petition — which she withdrew after the bench had reproached her for igniting “emotions in the country” with her “disturbing statements” — Sharma sought quashing of all the FIRs registered against her. As an alternative, she said the court should allow clubbing of the FIRs, in light of the top court’s earlier verdicts that say that not more than one FIR can be lodged in case the subject matter or offence is the same.
However, subsequent to the 1 July order, Sharma’s lawyer told the top court Tuesday that it had become nearly impossible for her to avail the alternative remedy granted by it, as there were ever-increasing, genuine threats to her life.
“Certain developments have happened after the last order. There are serious threats. There are reports of a person from Pakistan travelling, someone in Patna has been detained. Some more fresh FIRs have also been registered in West Bengal,” Singh told the bench.
The advocate further said that even after filing of the application, the threats have continued. “I beseech your lordships, there is genuine serious risk of life in me going to every place to quash the FIR. It is one allegation of so-called criminal offence and multiple FIRs. Your lordships are protectors of Article 21 (right to life),” he told the bench.
‘She apprehends immediate arrest’
Advocate Singh also pointed out a lookout circular issued against Sharma by the West Bengal Police, adding that she apprehends immediate arrest, which could deny her a fair opportunity to approach different HCs for seeking quashing of the FIRs.
“In support of her plea the petitioner has covered in the application after the order of 1 July, various incidents including one Salman Chisti claiming to be a Khadim of Ajmer Dargah has circulated a video where in a very disturbing manner he has called upon to cut the throat of the applicant petitioner (sic),” the court recorded in its order.
“One more person, a resident of UP, has made a viral video using abusive language against the petitioner and threatened to behead her. Some more FIRs have been registered in West Bengal, which were not in the knowledge of the petitioner,” the order further said.
The court also noted: “In light of the subsequent events, some of which have been noticed above, the concern of this court is to ensure that petitioner is able to avail the alternative remedy as permitted by this court on 1 July, 2022. In order to explore such modality, let notice be issued to respondents for 10 August.”
Liberty was granted to Sharma to serve the respondents through dasti (handing over of court summons by hand), as well as through the state’s standing counsel.
(Edited by Gitanjali Das)
Also Read: ‘My husband employed Muslims’ — Kanhaiya Lal’s family now wants same fate for perpetrators