# Tahir Mewati v. State of U.P

- **Citation:** (2025) 7 ILRA 225
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025-07-28
- **Case number:** Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25687 of 2025
- **Bench:** Sanjay Kumar Singh
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/tahir-mewati-v-state-of-u-p-53489
- **Pages:** 5

## Headnote

G.A

Issue for consideration
 Whether the applicant should be granted bail or
not?

Headnotes
A.
Criminal
Law
-
Bharatiya
Nyaya
Sanhita,
2023:
Sections
152,
352,
197(1)(c), 353(1)(c) - It is beyond the
shadow of doubt that social media is a
global platform for exchange of thoughts,
opinions and ideas. The internet and social
media has become an important tool
226 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
through which individuals can exercise
their right to freedom of expression but
the right to freedom of expression comes
with its own set of special responsibilities
and duties. It does not confer upon the
citizens
the
right
to
speak
without
responsibility nor does it grant unfettered
licence for every possible use of language.
There is an immediate need to check the
exploitation of social media platforms that
has political and societal reverberations
that go well beyond hacked systems and
stolen identities. Use of Cyberspace by some
people to vent out their anger and frustration by
travestying the Prime Minister, Key-figures
holding the highest office in the country or any
other individual is abhorrent and violates the
right to reputation of others.

High Courts are sentinels of justice with
extraordinary and inherent power to ensure that
rights and reputation of people are duly
protected. Considering the gravity and nature of
offence as well as misuse of social media
platforms, this Court cannot shut its eyes. The
Government is also not expected to act as a
silent spectator. (Para 7)

In the present case, the screenshots taken from
the
applicant's
Facebook
account
shows
objectionable visual captions, such as depictions
of Hon'ble Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi
touching the feet of Imran Khan, being tied with
a rope and dragged by Imran Khan and captions
like "Modi Maafi Maangta Hai" along with Urdu
texts allegedly glorifying Pakistan. The said
contents appears to be aimed at ridiculing the
Indian leadership and promoting a narrative
contrary to the interest of national sovereignty,
unity and integrity. The said material shared by
the applicant through his Facebook account is
provocative, objectionable and capable of
inciting communal disharmony and disturbing
public peace and order. The themes and
language used in the post indicate inclination
towards glorification of anti-national ideology,
which cannot be ignored. (Para 6)

Keeping in view the submissions advanced on
behalf of parties, nature of the contents
allegedly shared by the applicant, gravity of
offence and their potential impact on societal
harmony, role assigned to applicant and severity
of punishment, there is no good ground to
release the applicant on bail. (Para 8)

Bail application rejected. (E-4)

Case Law Cited
Niyaz Ahmad Khan Vs. State of U.P. and
another,
MANU/UP/0417/2022;
2022
SCC
OnLine All 105 (Para 7)

List of Acts
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

List of Keywords
Criminal Law; bail; social media; facebook
account; objectionable; inflammatory.

Appearances for Parties
For Applicant: Rajesh Chandra Jaiswal,
Sachchida Nand Ojha and Vikas Srivastava

For Opposite Party: G.A.

## Text

7 All. Tahir Mewati Vs. State of U.P.
225
prosecution case shall not be vitiated due to
want of the public witnesses.

6.13.Huge quantity of 112.360
Kg
Ganja
cannot
be
planted.
On
interrogation, the apprehended persons
disclosed the modus operandi adopted by
them in illicit trafficking of recovered
Ganja.

6.14. As per the recovery memo,
the videography and photography of said
recovery of Ganja were done and the same
were also uploaded on e-Evidence App.

6.15. In the case of State by the
Inspector of Police Versus B. Ramu,
2024 SCC OnLine SC 4073, there was
recovery of 232.5 kg of ganja on search of
the house of the accused Nos. 1 and 2. The
third accused was indicated as being the
conspirator for procurement/supply of
ganja so recovered, who had preferred
anticipatory bail under Section 438 of
Cr.P.C., which was allowed by the High
Court, thereafter, State of Tamil Nadu
preferred a Special Leave Petition (Cri.)
against the order of the High Court before
Hon'ble the Apex Court, which has been
allowed vide order dated 12.02.2024 setting
aside the order of the High Court making
following observations in Paragraph Nos.
11 and 12:-

"11. In case of recovery of such a
huge quantity of narcotic substance, the
Courts should be slow in granting even
regular bail to the accused what to talk of
anticipatory bail more so when the accused
is
alleged
to
be
having
criminal
antecedents.

12. For entertaining a prayer for
bail in a case involving recovery of
commercial quantity of narcotic drug or
psychotropic substance, the Court would
have to mandatorily record the satisfaction
in terms of the rider contained in Section
37 of the NDPS Act."

7. Considering the facts of the case as
noted above, this Court finds that primafacie Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the N.D.P.S.
Act does not stands satisfied.

8. In view of the above, the instant bail
application lacks merit and is accordingly
dismissed.
----------
(2025) 7 ILRA 225
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 28.07.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J.

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25687 of
2025

Tahir Mewati ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Applicant:
Rajesh Chandra Jaiswal, Sachchida Nand
Ojha, Vikas Srivastava

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
G.A

Issue for consideration
 Whether the applicant should be granted bail or
not?

Headnotes
A.
Criminal
Law
-
Bharatiya
Nyaya
Sanhita,
2023:
Sections
152,
352,
197(1)(c), 353(1)(c) - It is beyond the
shadow of doubt that social media is a
global platform for exchange of thoughts,
opinions and ideas. The internet and social
media has become an important tool
226 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
through which individuals can exercise
their right to freedom of expression but
the right to freedom of expression comes
with its own set of special responsibilities
and duties. It does not confer upon the
citizens
the
right
to
speak
without
responsibility nor does it grant unfettered
licence for every possible use of language.
There is an immediate need to check the
exploitation of social media platforms that
has political and societal reverberations
that go well beyond hacked systems and
stolen identities. Use of Cyberspace by some
people to vent out their anger and frustration by
travestying the Prime Minister, Key-figures
holding the highest office in the country or any
other individual is abhorrent and violates the
right to reputation of others.

High Courts are sentinels of justice with
extraordinary and inherent power to ensure that
rights and reputation of people are duly
protected. Considering the gravity and nature of
offence as well as misuse of social media
platforms, this Court cannot shut its eyes. The
Government is also not expected to act as a
silent spectator. (Para 7)

In the present case, the screenshots taken from
the
applicant's
Facebook
account
shows
objectionable visual captions, such as depictions
of Hon'ble Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi
touching the feet of Imran Khan, being tied with
a rope and dragged by Imran Khan and captions
like "Modi Maafi Maangta Hai" along with Urdu
texts allegedly glorifying Pakistan. The said
contents appears to be aimed at ridiculing the
Indian leadership and promoting a narrative
contrary to the interest of national sovereignty,
unity and integrity. The said material shared by
the applicant through his Facebook account is
provocative, objectionable and capable of
inciting communal disharmony and disturbing
public peace and order. The themes and
language used in the post indicate inclination
towards glorification of anti-national ideology,
which cannot be ignored. (Para 6)

Keeping in view the submissions advanced on
behalf of parties, nature of the contents
allegedly shared by the applicant, gravity of
offence and their potential impact on societal
harmony, role assigned to applicant and severity
of punishment, there is no good ground to
release the applicant on bail. (Para 8)

Bail application rejected. (E-4)

Case Law Cited
Niyaz Ahmad Khan Vs. State of U.P. and
another,
MANU/UP/0417/2022;
2022
SCC
OnLine All 105 (Para 7)

List of Acts
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

List of Keywords
Criminal Law; bail; social media; facebook
account; objectionable; inflammatory.

Appearances for Parties
For Applicant: Rajesh Chandra Jaiswal,
Sachchida Nand Ojha and Vikas Srivastava

For Opposite Party: G.A.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar
Singh, J.)

1. By means of this bail application,
applicant Tahir Mewati, who is involved in
Case Crime No. 139 of 2025, under
Sections 152, 352, 197(1)(c), 353(1)(C) of
BNS, 2023, police station Salempur,
district Bulandshahar, seeks enlargement
on bail during the pendency of trial.

2. Brief facts of the case, which are
required to be stated are that complainantVishal Chaudhary, Sub Inspector, police
station Salempur, District Bulandshahar got
a First Information Report lodged on
14.05.2025 for the offence under Sections
152, 352, 197(1)(c), 353(1)(C) of BNS,
2023 against the applicant-Tahir Mewati
stating inter alia that he came to know
through social media post that a person is
running a Facebook account/ ID in the
name of Tahir Mewati, who is making
objectionable videos of Hon'ble Prime
Minster of India, Shri Narendra Modi viral
7 All. Tahir Mewati Vs. State of U.P.
227
on social media from his Facebook
account. When he checked the ID of Tahir
Mewati, it was revealed that Tahir Mewati
from his Facebook ID URL ID https//www
facebook.com/profile.
Php?id
100084509229593 is making objectionable
contents and Pakistan supported videos of
Hon'ble Prime Minster of India, Shri
Narendra Modi viral and posting from his
Facebook ID. In follow-up action, it was
found that the person running the above
Facebook ID in the name of Tahir Mewati
is Tahir, son of Ikramuddin, resident of
Parigram
Rasidpur,
police
station
Salempur, District Bulandshahar. The said
video in question could potentially disrupt
the
social
harmony
and
spoil
the
atmosphere in the society.

3. Heard Mr. Vikas Srivastava, learned
counsel for the applicant, Mr. Rabindra
Kumar
Singh,
learned
Additional
Government Advocate assisted by Mr.
Prashant Kumar Singh, learned Brief
Holder representing the State of U.P.

4. It is contended by learned counsel
for the applicant that a fake Facebook ID
has been created by someone else in the
name of applicant, which was being
operated by that unknown person with a
view to tarnish his good image in the
society. The applicant neither posted
anything on social media nor made any
video viral against Shri Narendra Modi,
Hon'ble Prime Minster of India. Hence, the
applicant, who is languishing in jail since
14.05.2025 and having no criminal history
to his credit is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Lastly, it is submitted that in case, applicant
is released on bail, he will not misuse the
liberty of bail.

5. Per contra, learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for the
State refuting the above submissions made
on behalf of the applicant opposed the
prayer for bail of the applicant by
contending that :

5.1. The factual stand taken by
the applicant before this Court and before
the Sessions Judge are entirely different. In
this regard, it is further pointed out that
before the Court of Sessions judge, it was
submitted on behalf of the applicant that he
has not created or posted any objectionable
contents or video with malicious intent.
Only certain memes were uploaded on the
Facebook account of the applicant. The
applicant did not share any material, which
could disturb public peace or tranquillity.
Now before this Court, the applicant has
come up with a different plea that he
neither posted anything on social media nor
made any video viral against Shri Narendra
Modi, Hon'ble Prime Minster of India,
which is against the evidence on record.

5.2. Much emphasis has been
given by contending that the applicant
posted objectionable and inflammatory
videos on the social media platformFacebook, which were clearly intended to
glorify violent extremism and promote antinational sentiments.

5.3. The materials, which have
been posted on social media to be aimed at
disturbing communal harmony and public
order.

5.4. Such conduct of the accusedapplicant also poses a threat to the
sovereignty and unity of the country.

5.5. The
other
corroborative
digital evidences, like, recovery of the
mobile phone allegedly used in operating
the account, IP address logs traced to the
228 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
applicant's residence, account recovery
email and phone number linked to the
applicant and metadata and digital time
stamps indicating login activity coinciding
with the applicant's location are also on
record.

5.6. Lastly, it is submitted that
there exists sufficient material on record to
indicate the seriousness of the allegations,
including digital evidences which prima
facie
connect
the
applicant
to
the
objectionable content shared by him.
Hence, the bail application of the applicant
is liable to be rejected, otherwise a wrong
signal will go to the public at large, which
may encourage others to indulge in similar
unlawful activities.

6. Having heard learned counsel for
the parties and examined the matter in its
entirety, I find that the screenshots which
were taken from the applicant's Facebook
account
shows
objectionable
visual
captions, such as depictions of Hon'ble
Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi
touching the feet of Imran Khan, being tied
with a rope and dragged by Imran Khan
and captions like "Modi Maafi Maangta Hai"
along with Urdu texts allegedly glorifying
Pakistan. The said contents appears to be aimed
at ridiculing the Indian leadership and
promoting a narrative contrary to the interest of
national sovereignty, unity and integrity. This
Court is also of the view that said material
shared by the applicant through his Facebook
account is provocative, objectionable and
capable of inciting communal disharmony and
disturbing public peace and order. The themes
and language used in the post indicate
inclination towards glorification of anti-national
ideology, which cannot be ignored.

7. Here, it would also be apposite to
mention the observations made by this
Court in similar matter in the case of Niyaz
Ahmad Khan versus State of U.P. and
another, 2022 SCC OnLine All 105,
which are as under:-

"9- Having examined the matter
in its entirety, here it would be apposite to
mention that this Court is of the view that it
is beyond the shadow of doubt that social
media is a global platform for exchange of
thoughts, opinions and ideas. The internet
and social media has become an important
tool through which individuals can exercise
their right to freedom of expression but the
right to freedom of expression comes with
its own set of special responsibilities and
duties. It does not confer upon the citizens
the right to speak without responsibility nor
does it grant unfettered licence for every
possible use of language. There is an
immediate need to check the exploitation of
social media platforms that has political
and societal reverberations that go well
beyond
hacked
systems
and
stolen
identities. Use of Cyberspace by some
people to vent out their anger and
frustration
by
travestying
the
Prime
Minister, Key-figures holding the highest
office in the country or any other individual
is abhorrent and violates the right to
reputation of others. These kind of acts,
posting and sharing unhealthy materials
with
unparliamentary
language
and
remarks, etc. on social media without any
solid basis cause a deleterious effect on the
society at large, ergo in order to protect the
reputation and character of individuals, it
should be completely stopped. Since such
incidents are on rise in a civilized society
day by day and are polluting the minds of
people, therefore, now it is high time to
evolve some more and full proof screening
mechanism to regulate, check and control
the unhealthy posts on social media. It
would be fair enough to state that such
7 All. Dault Ram & Ors. Vs. State of U.P.
229
persons who are deliberately involved in
such acts directly or behind the curtain
with oblique motive or to settle their score
adopting different modus-operandi are
hazardous to the civilized society and they
are not entitled for any sympathy in justice
delivery system. High Courts are sentinels
of justice with extraordinary and inherent
power to ensure that rights and reputation
of people are duly protected. Considering
the gravity and nature of offence as well as
misuse of social media platforms, this
Court cannot shut its eyes. The Government
is also not expected to act as a silent
spectator.

10- Accordingly, Government is
directed to take appropriate remedial
measures/steps in order to control and
eradicate such proliferating and booming
devastating menace, to stop the misuse of
social media platforms and to maintain
healthy atmosphere in the society, which is
the most important and essential factor for
a civilized society."

8. As a fall out and consequence of
above discussions as well as considering
the overall facts and circumstances of the
case, keeping in view the submissions
advanced on behalf of parties, nature of the
contents allegedly shared by the applicant,
gravity of offence and their potential
impact on societal harmony, role assigned
to applicant and severity of punishment, I
do not find any good ground to release the
applicant on bail.

9. Accordingly, the bail application of
applicant is rejected.

10.
It
is
made
clear
that
the
observations contained in the instant order
are confined to the issue of bail.
----------
(2025) 7 ILRA 229
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 23.07.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, J.
THE HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 540 of 1984

Dault Ram & Ors. ...Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellants:
Sandeep Kumar Dubey, Kundan Singh

Counsel for the Respondent:
D.G.A.

ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION
Whether the conviction of appellants under
Sections 302, 302/34, 307, 307/34, and 323 IPC
was
sustainable
in
light
of
alleged
inconsistencies and doubts raised by the
defence and Amicus Curiae.

HEADNOTES
Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, 1860 -
Section - 34, 302, 307, 323 - Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 313 -
Criminal Appeal - aagainst Conviction and
Sentence - FIR lodged alleging commission of
offences of Murder with Common Intention,
Attempt to Murder with Common Intention, and
Voluntarily Causing Hurt - Accused's Statement
recorded
under
Section
313
CrPC
-
Investigation completed - Charge-sheet filed -
Sessions Trial commenced - Conviction and
Sentence awarded - Appreciation of Evidence -
Amicus Curiae raised concerns regarding delay
in FIR, inconsistencies in witness testimonies,
and absence of physical evidence - Court's finds
that - (i) Testimonies of injured witnesses
placed on higher evidentiary footing; one
prosecution
witness
remained
consistent
throughout
cross-examination
on
material
particulars; defence failed to elicit any material
contradiction - (ii) Minor contradictions and