Apex Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Manipur's Trans Women Activist Over Her Social Media Remarks, Asks State To Ignore One-Time Bona Fide Mistake
The Supreme Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against a trans women activist over her social media, i.e. Facebook remarks complaining about her non-association in the decision-making process by the Manipur State Transgender Welfare Board.
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan ordered, “We have persuaded the learned Advocate General and the Standing Counsel for the State to be magnanimous and ignore the one-time bonafide mistake made by the petitioner. He has fairly agreed to our suggestion…In view of this, and subject to the petitioner’s complying with the statement made before us on her behalf, the notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C., issued to her by the Officer-in- Charge, Porompat Police Station, and all the subsequent proceedings initiated pursuant thereto, are hereby quashed…We appreciate the gesture shown by learned Advocate General and learned standing counsel for the State of Manipur.”
Senior Advocate Anand Grover appeared for the Petitioner, and Advocate General Lenin Singh Hijam appeared for the Respondents.
Criminal Proceedings were initiated against the petitioner due to an unfortunate incident of some avoidable remarks made by the petitioner on social media, i.e., Facebook complaining about her non-association in the decision-making process, where she was initially invited to attend a meeting organized by the Manipur State Transgender Welfare Board. She was a representative of trans-women.
The writ petition was assailing the initiation of criminal proceedings. The Court previously had stayed the arrest of the petitioner with a further direction to not register any case against her based on the posts. She was also asked to join the investigation. Thereafter, she joined the investigation.
The Counsel for the Petitioner stated that the petitioner regrated the remarks she made on Facebook, and he explained that she had no intention, at all, to harm the reputation or image of the Government Department(s) or of any Authority.
He further submitted that it was only an effort to seek her representation in the Manipur State Transgender Welfare Board so that the voice of trans-women could also be heard. He conveyed the petitioner’s undertaking that in future, no such remark shall be made by her on any public platform or social media.
Further, as and when she has any grievance, she will address the same to the Higher Authorities or will seek redressal of her grievances before an appropriate forum.
The Court said, “We have persuaded the learned Advocate General and the Standing Counsel for the State to be magnanimous and ignore the one-time bonafide mistake made by the petitioner. He has fairly agreed to our suggestion.”
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the writ petition.
Cause Title: Thangjam Santa Singh @Santa Khurai v. The State of Manipur & Ors.
Appearances:
Petitioner: Senior Advocate Anand Grover, AOR M/s PLR Chambers and Co. and Advocate Suhaan Mukerji
Respondents: Advocate General Lenin Singh Hijam, AOR Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Advocates Karun Sharma, Anupama Ngangom and Rajkumari Divyasana.
