The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to an applicant, Sajid Chaudhary, who was arrested under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for forwarding a social media post with the slogan ‘Pakistan Zindabad’. Justice Santosh Rai held that merely posting a message supporting a country does not attract the ingredients of Section 152 BNS, which deals with acts endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.
Case Background
The bail application was filed by Sajid Chaudhary in connection with Case Crime No. 134 of 2025, registered at Police Station Parikshitgarh, District Meerut. The applicant was arrested and has been in jail since May 13, 2025, for an offence under Section 152 of the BNS. The allegation was that he forwarded a post on social media which stated, ‘Kamran Bhatti Proud of You, Pakistan Zindabad’.
Arguments of the Parties
The counsel for the applicant, Ajay Kumar Pandey and Alok Singh, argued that Mr. Chaudhary is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motives. They submitted that the applicant only forwarded a post and did not create or circulate any video. It was further contended that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and that the conclusion of the trial would take a significant amount of time.
Opposing the bail, the learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA) for the State of U.P. argued that the applicant is a “separatist” who had previously attempted similar offences. The counter-affidavit stated that an inquiry into the applicant’s Facebook ID revealed that he had earlier tried to commit an offence that endangered the integrity and sovereignty of India. However, the AGA admitted that the applicant has no prior criminal history and could not submit any evidence to show that the applicant had made any statement against the integrity and sovereignty of India.
Court’s Analysis and Observations
After hearing both sides, the court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Santosh Rai, undertook a detailed analysis of Section 152 of the BNS. The Court observed that this is a new section with stringent punishment and, therefore, must be invoked with “reasonable care and standards of a reasonable person.”
The judgment emphasized that spoken words or social media posts are covered by the liberty of freedom of speech and expression, which “should not be narrowly construed unless it is of such nature which effect the sovereignty and integrity of a country or encourages separatism.”
For an act to fall under Section 152 BNS, the court clarified, “there must be purpose by spoken or written words, signs, visible representations, the electronic communication to promote secession, armed rebellion, subversive activities or encourages feeling of separating activities or endangers the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India.”
Drawing a distinction, the court stated, “Therefore merely posting a message to simply shows supporting of any country may create anger or disharmony among citizens of India and may also be punishable under Section 196 BNS which is punishable up to seven years but definitively will not attract the ingredients of Section 152 BNS.”
The Court also cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Imran Pratapgadhi vs State of Gujarat and another; 2025 SCC OnLine SC 678, which highlighted that “liberty of thought and expression is one of the cornerstone ideals of our Constitution.” It further noted the Apex Court’s observation that cases regarding social media posts should be evaluated based on the “standards of reasonable, strong-minded, firm and courageous individuals and not based on standards of people with weak and oscillating minds.”
The Decision
Finding force in the applicant’s submissions and considering the uncertainty of trial conclusion, the applicant’s fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution, and overcrowding in jails, the Court decided to grant bail.
Sajid Chaudhary was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties. The court imposed several conditions, including that the applicant shall not tamper with evidence, shall not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial, and shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed. Breach of any condition will be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Case: Sajid Chaudhary vs. State of U.P.
Bail Application No.: 21835 of 2025
Bench: Justice Santosh Rai
