The Tripura High Court has rejected a plea filed by former Chief Minister and senior CPI(M) leader Manik Sarkar seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against him over an alleged provocative speech at a political programme in Agartala. The court also advised him to refrain from making provocative or hateful speeches in the future and to help maintain an atmosphere of peace, harmony and fraternity.
A Division Bench comprising Justice T. Amarnath Goud and Justice Biswajit Palit passed the order on Tuesday after hearing Sarkar’s plea.
The FIR was registered at West Agartala Police Station on August 16, following a complaint lodged by Prabir Roy over a speech allegedly delivered by Sarkar at a political programme in Agartala on August 10. The case was registered under Sections 192, 353(1)(b) and 61(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
According to the complainant, Sarkar had warned that the movement would be intensified if 11 demands raised against the state and central governments were not accepted. The complaint alleged that a Bengali expression used in the speech conveyed a call for an aggressive or militant form of agitation, potentially creating the risk of violence and disruption of public order.
Sarkar, however, denied the allegations, contending that his remarks had been mistranslated and presented out of context. His counsel submitted that the speech was delivered in the context of a nationwide protest called by central trade unions, farmers’ organisations and other civil society groups against the policies of the Union government.
The defence further argued that Sarkar had supported the protesters’ demands while also urging them to cooperate with the police in the event of arrest. It maintained that the FIR was politically motivated and that his speech did not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences invoked against him.
Opposing the plea, the state government told the court that the speech was delivered before a large gathering at a time when the law and order situation was tense. The state referred to an earlier incident in which more than 5,000 protesters allegedly attempted to move towards the office of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate after breaking through two security barricades. Police subsequently stopped their advance.
However, the state clarified that the alleged barricade-breaking incident had taken place before Sarkar’s speech and that he was not being held responsible for that incident. It argued that the overall context of the speech and its potential impact on the gathering warranted investigation.
While considering the plea, the Division Bench observed that the power to quash an FIR at the preliminary stage of an investigation must be exercised with considerable caution. It said the investigating agency would need to examine the speech in its entirety, the surrounding circumstances, the reaction of the audience and the available audio-visual recordings.
The court also observed that the dispute over the precise translation and contextual meaning of the Bengali expression could not be conclusively resolved at the writ petition stage.
Noting that the possibility of invoking Section 192 of the BNS could not be ruled out merely because no actual riot or violent incident had occurred, the Bench held that the allegations in the FIR prima facie disclosed cognisable offences warranting further investigation.
Accordingly, the court dismissed Sarkar’s plea to quash the FIR, allowing the investigation to proceed.
At the same time, taking into consideration Sarkar’s age and his former position as Chief Minister, the court observed that he could approach the appropriate lower court for bail. Such an application would be considered subject to the applicable legal conditions.
