The Tripura High Court (HC) on October 13 rejected a petition by former Chief Minister Manik Sarkar challenging a police case over his alleged remarks at a political programme in Agartala on August 10, holding that the allegations required further investigation into the speech’s context and potential implications.
Key Takeaways
-
The Tripura High Court rejected former Chief Minister Manik Sarkar’s plea to quash an FIR over an allegedly provocative speech in Agartala on August 10.
-
The court held that the allegations prima facie warranted investigation and said authorities must examine the speech, its context and available recordings.
-
The bench directed Sarkar to avoid provocative or hate speeches and said he could approach the lower court for bail subject to appropriate conditions.
The Tripura High Court (HC) has refused to quash an FIR against former Chief Minister Manik Sarkar over an allegedly provocative speech at a political gathering in Agartala. A division bench of Justice T Amarnath Goud and Justice Biswajit Palit ruled that the allegations disclosed prima facie ingredients of cognisable offences. The judges said investigators must examine the complete speech, its context and the audience’s reaction before reaching conclusions.
Tripura HC Says Allegations Warrant Investigation
The division bench dismissed Sarkar’s petition challenging the FIR registered against him at West Agartala police station on August 16. Police invoked Sections 192, 353(1)(b) and 61(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, following a complaint by Prabir Roy.
The court observed that the allegations in the complaint required further investigation. It also said that disputes over the translation and contextual meaning of the Bengali expression attributed to Sarkar could not be settled at the initial stage of writ proceedings.
The judges emphasised that courts should exercise their power to quash an FIR at an early stage sparingly. They said investigators must examine the evidence and circumstances before determining the implications of the alleged remarks.
Complaint Links Speech to 11-Point Charter of Demands
According to the complaint, Sarkar addressed a political programme in Agartala on August 10 and warned that the movement against the state and central governments would intensify if authorities failed to accept an 11-point charter of demands.
Roy alleged that a Bengali expression attributed to the former chief minister suggested that the country and the state would have to follow a militant or aggressive course of agitation.
The complainant further claimed that the remarks could incite violence and disturb public order. These allegations formed the basis of the police case against Sarkar.
However, the petition raised questions about the translation and interpretation of the expression. The court declined to resolve those disputed issues at this stage and left them for examination during the investigation.
Manik Sarkar Claims Remarks Were Mistranslated
Sarkar challenged the allegations and maintained that his words had been mistranslated and taken out of context. His counsel told the court that the speech concerned a nationwide protest against government policies.
According to the defence, central trade unions, farmers’ organisations and other civil society groups had called the movement. Sarkar maintained that he supported the protest’s demands and urged participants to cooperate peacefully with the police during their arrest.
He also argued that the FIR stemmed from political motives. His petition contended that the words attributed to him did not fulfil the legal requirements of the offences invoked by the police.
The court, however, declined to accept the request to quash the FIR at this stage.
State Cites Tense Law-and-Order Situation
Opposing Sarkar’s petition, the state government told the court that he had delivered the speech before a large gathering amid a tense law-and-order situation.
The state submitted that more than 5,000 participants had crossed two security barricades while marching towards the office of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in Sadar. Police subsequently halted the march.
However, the state clarified that the barricade breach occurred before Sarkar’s address. It did not attribute that incident to the former chief minister’s subsequent speech.
The government nevertheless argued that investigators needed to examine the surrounding circumstances and assess the potential impact of the remarks on the gathering.
Court Calls for Examination of Full Speech
The bench said investigators must assess the speech in its entirety rather than rely on isolated expressions. It specifically identified the speech’s context, the audience’s reaction and available audio-visual recordings as relevant elements of the investigation.
The judges also clarified that the absence of an actual riot did not, by itself, rule out the applicability of Section 192 of the BNS.
The ruling leaves the investigation to proceed, with the disputed interpretation of Sarkar’s remarks requiring further examination.
High Court Advises Sarkar to Promote Peace
After dismissing the petition, the bench directed Sarkar to refrain from making provocative or hate speeches in the future. It urged the former chief minister to promote peace, harmony and brotherhood.
The court also considered Sarkar’s age and his tenure as chief minister. In view of these circumstances, it said he could approach the lower court with an appropriate bail application.
The bench indicated that the lower court could consider the application subject to suitable conditions.
