Supreme Court: 'Courts Aren't for Moral Policing' Quashes Costs on Tweets

The Supreme Court ruled against moral policing by overturning a Punjab and Haryana High Court order that imposed Rs 10 lakh costs on Vishal Dadlani and Tehseen Poonawalla for tweets about a Jain monk. The apex court emphasized the protection of freedom of speech and expression under constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday overturned a Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling that levied Rs 10 lakh costs on musician Vishal Dadlani and political activist Tehseen Poonawalla for allegedly offensive tweets about a Jain monk in 2016.

In 2019, the High Court dismissed the criminal case against the duo, yet imposed fines, which prompted Poonawalla to seek relief from the Supreme Court. Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan clarified that the court's role is not to engage in moral policing.

The bench emphasized the pivotal role of Article 19(1)(a) in safeguarding freedom of speech and expression, noting that no offense was committed under Section 482 of the CrPC. This decision arose from tweets criticizing priest Tarun Sagar's attendance in the nude at a legislative assembly session, an issue the High Court initially penalized as harmful to religious sentiments.

(With inputs from agencies.)