Arham Jain
On March 3, the Supreme Court of India heard a case against poet and Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi, who is being charged by the police for posting a song on social media. There were humorous exchanges between senior counsel Kapil Sibal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta during the case, which sparked legal and literary debates. A bench consisting of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Abhay S. Oka questioned how the police handled the case and underlined the value of free speech and expression.
An FIR was filed against Mr. Pratapgarhi for allegedly stirring religious feelings after his social media account posted a video with the lyrics to the song “Aye khoon ke pyaaso baat suno.” When the Gujarat High Court was unable to provide him with redress, he approached to Supreme Court.
Humorous Exchange between the Attorneys
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta representing the Gujarat government, during the hearing, questioned if the poem was of the caliber of well-known poets like Habib Jalib or Faiz Ahmed Faiz.
Tushar Mehta stated, “The level of this can never be Faiz or Habib Jalib,”, describing the poem as “sadak chhap” (pedestrian).
Kapil Sibal representative of Pratapgarhi, responded humorously
“My poems are also sadakchaap.”
Mr. Mehta disagreeing the Mr. Sibal’s statement by praising him
“No, his (Mr. Sibal) poems are really good!”
Justice Oka also joined the witty discussion, and stated,
“I told my brother (Justice Bhuyan) in a lighter vein, don’t call your poems sadakchaap, because you’ll have to write one poem for me at the end of May. So please don’t say that.”
Continuing his criticism of the poem shared by Pratapgarhi, Mr. Mehta remarked,
“I don’t admit it’s a poem. Why? Sher kabhi accha ya bura nahi hota; ya hota hai ya nahi hota.”
Justice Oka Delightedly asked, “Now you want to compete with him? In writing poems?”
Mr. Sibal, added, “He’s (Mehta) just not trying. He has a wealth of knowledge in this area.”
Justice Oka suggested that Mr. Mehta might not have enough time to write poetry, but Mr. Mehta responded with a witty remark,
“No, I have time. People say you have to fall in love to be a poet. I have never.”
While deciding the case Justice Oka stated, “Some sensitivity has to be shown by the police before registering an FIR. They must at least read and understand (the article of the Constitution). Seventy-five years after the Constitution, the freedom of speech and expression has to be at least now understood by the police.” He further added, “It is not against any religion. This poem indirectly says even if somebody indulges in violence, we will not indulge in violence. That is the message the poem gives.”
The present matter is now listed and shall be heard after two weeks.
Case Name: Imran Pratapgadhi v. State of Gujarat
Case Number: SCRA(Q) No. 551/2025
Bench: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan