Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has dismissed Bhojpuri singer and social activist Neha Singh Rathore’s petition seeking to quash an FIR registered against her for allegedly inflammatory social media posts about Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Bihar elections, and Hindu–Muslim politics following the Pahalgam terrorist attack.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi delivered the judgment on September 19, 2025, in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 3852 of 2025 (Neha Singh Rathore @ Neha Kumari v. State of U.P.), directing the petitioner to cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
The case stems from FIR No. 0111 of 2025 registered at Police Station Hazratganj, Lucknow, under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including Sections 196, 197, 353, 302, and 152, and Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2008, based on her social media posts made after the April 22, 2025, Pahalgam terrorist attack.
The controversial posts were made following the tragic incident at Pahalgam, Jammu & Kashmir, where 26 Hindu tourists were killed by terrorists. The court noted the timing was particularly sensitive as “the security and integrity of the country were under threat and the Government was taking all possible efforts to curb such a situation.”
The petitioner’s counsel, Kamal Kishore Sharma, argued that as a singer and social activist, she had fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(a) to express her views on social media, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat, where poetry was protected as free speech.
However, Government Advocate V. K. Singh countered that the posts had gone viral internationally, particularly in Pakistan, with supportive responses from there. He argued that the timing and content showed “vengeance against the Bharatiya Janata Party and its leaders including the Prime Minister” and attempted to create Hindu–Muslim divisions.
The court distinguished the case from Imran Pratapgadhi, noting that in that case “the poem does not refer to any religion, caste or language and it does not refer to any persons belonging to any religion.” In contrast, the present case involved posts that “are against the Prime Minister of India and Home Minister of India,” with “religious angle, [and a] Bihar election angle accusing the Prime Minister by name.”
It further emphasized that while Article 19 guarantees freedom of speech and expression, this right is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) for maintaining public order and the sovereignty and integrity of India. The court stated: “The extent of protection of speech and expression would depend on whether such speech and expression would constitute a propagation of ideas or would have any social value.”
The court applied the Bhajan Lal guidelines for quashing FIRs, concluding that none of the established criteria for interference were met. It further found that “the allegations in the First Information Report and other material, prima facie, disclose cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by the police officers.”
Referencing established precedents, the court cited Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar and Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar, which upheld restrictions on speech that incites violence or undermines national unity. The court noted: “The State can impose restrictions to prevent speech that incites violence or undermines national unity or disrupts public order.”
The court also referenced a similar case, Ajeet Yadav v. State of U.P., where a Division Bench observed: “Emotions cannot be permitted to overflow to an extent that Constitutional Authorities of the country are dragged into disrepute by employment of disrespectful words.”
In another precedent cited, Deepak v. State of U.P., the court dismissed a petition challenging an FIR for derogatory comments about the Chief Minister, holding that such cases require full investigation rather than summary dismissal.
The court further stated: “Since the investigation is going on, therefore, we restrain ourselves to comment on the merits of the issue, having expectation that fair, independent and impartial investigation is conducted and concluded strictly in accordance with law.”
The court directed Neha Singh Rathore to appear before the Investigating Officer on September 26, 2025, at 11:00 a.m. and to cooperate throughout the investigation until the filing of the police report.
Case Title: Neha Singh Rathore @ Neha Kumari v. State of U.P.
!["No Loudspeakers For Azan, No Fundamental Right To Create Noise," Says Allahabad HC To Two Mosques [Read Judgment]](/secure/uploads/2020/01/lj_4995_Allahabad_HC_AZAN.jpg)
