On Wednesday, the Supreme Court discharged the Chhatisgarh appeal put up by stimulating the High Court’s order staying the investigation into the FIR filed against Dr Raman Singh, BJP National Vice President and former Chief Minister, and BJP Spokesperson Sambit Patra for their tweets claiming that the Congress party has prepared a toolkit to tarnish the country’s image in the international community.
While staying the probe, it noted that “prima facie, no case is brought out against the petitioner, and criminal proceedings are obviously attended against the petitioner with malafides, or political animosity.”
When so many individuals have contacted different courts throughout the country in regard to Toolkit matters, the Bench stated that this case cannot be given special consideration.
The two special leave applications submitted by the State of Chhattisgarh against the Chhattisgarh High Court’s judgement of June 11, 2021, were dismissed by a Bench consisting of Justice Surya Kant, CJI NV Ramana, and Justice Hima Kohli.
The Bench stated right away that the case should be decided by the High Court. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the State of Chhattisgarh, emphasised the importance of a true hearing by the High Court, given the Court’s observations in the impugned decision.
We are not willing to interfere, so don’t waste your time. Allow the High Court to make its decision. That observation will be removed. According to the Bench.
At the request of one Akash Sharma, State President of the National Student Union of India (NSUI), Chhattisgarh, an FIR was filed against Dr Raman Singh and Sambit Patra under Sections 504 (Intentional insult with the purpose of causing a breach of the peace), 505 (1) (c), and 188 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR dated May 19, 2021, was made by a political person with political motivations, according to the High Court’s challenged ruling.
A Single Court of Appeal According to Narendra Kumar Vyas, the police filed the FIR without investigating the complaint’s veracity, and no case can be brought out from the FIR’s face. As a result, continuing the inquiry based on the contested FIR would constitute an abuse of the legal system.