Bombay High Court: In a case wherein, the petitioner was alleged to have shared an Instagram post regarding the war between Bharat and Pakistan, which was likely to adversely affect public peace, the Division Bench of Gauri Godse and Somasekhar Sundaresan, JJ., opined that at the most, the petitioner’s act of sharing the post could be termed as an indiscretion by a young student still taking education, but still the Sinhagad Academy of Engineering (‘the Academy’) rusticated her.
The Court expressed its shock that even after the petitioner deleted the post, the FIR was lodged against her, and the Investigating Officer concerned, without even considering the fact that the post was deleted and the petitioner had tendered an apology, took her into custody. Thus, the Court held that the rustication order should be suspended and after considering that the petitioner had upcoming exams, held that she should be released on bail by the Jail Authorities.
Background
The petitioner, a 19-year-old student, was pursuing a Bachelor of Engineering in Information Technology from Sinhagad Academy of Engineering (‘the Academy’) and was arrested and detained in police custody pursuant to an FIR lodged against her. It was alleged that she had shared a post on her Instagram account on 7-5-2025 regarding the war between Bharat and Pakistan, which had caused tension between the two different religions and was likely to adversely affect public peace. Thus, the present petition was filed to seek permission to appear for the Semester IV Exams scheduled between 24-5-2025 and 3-6-2025 and she missed appearing for the exams scheduled on 24-5-2025 and 27-5-2025, as she was in custody and was rusticated. The next three papers were scheduled on 29-5-2025, 31-5-2025, and 3-6-2025.
Due to the petitioner’s Instagram post, a FIR was lodged against her for the offences punishable under Sections 152, 196, 197, 299, 352, and 353 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Thus, a criminal application was also filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the FIR lodged against her and also prayed for an interim relief for her release.
The petitioner submitted that she was unable to appear for the exams, which were scheduled on 24-5-2025 and 27-5-2025, as she was in custody and had been rusticated. She therefore submits that the Petitioner be permitted to appear for the two missed exams as a special case. Counsel for the Academy submitted that since the Savitribai Phule Pune University conducted the exams, the Academy could not take the decision independently.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court noted that immediately within two hours, the petitioner had deleted the post, and she publicly expressed remorse and tendered an apology. The Court opined that it was shocking that even after she deleted the post, the FIR was lodged against her on 9-5-2025, and the Investigating Officer concerned, without even considering the fact that the post was deleted and the petitioner had tendered an apology, took her into custody.
The Court opined that at the most, the petitioner’s act of sharing the post could be termed as an indiscretion by a young student still taking education, but still the Academy rusticated her. The Court also opined that in relation to the permission to appear for the missed examination was concerned; the Court could not issue any directions at the present stage. The Court stated that the petitioner would be at liberty to amend the petition and seek appropriate relief or adopt any other procedure that could enable her to seek permission to appear for the exams that she missed and if any such application was made, the same would be considered on its own merits.
The Court stated that there was no reason to detain the petitioner in custody and opined that the order of rustication was hurriedly issued without giving an adequate opportunity to the petitioner to respond to any such proposed action appropriately. The Court stated that the rustication order completely ignored the petitioner’s act of deleting the post, expressing remorse, and tendering an apology. Thus, the Court held that the rustication order should be suspended.
The Court, after considering that the petitioner had upcoming exams, held that she should be released on bail by the Jail Authorities concerned of the Yerawada Central Prison. The Court clarified that even though the petitioner should cooperate with the investigation, she should not be called to the police station during the period of examination.
The Court stated that the police should ensure that the petitioner was given adequate police protection for appearing at the examination, as required. Thus, the Court held that the order of rustication issued on 9-5-2025, by Respondent 3, should remain suspended and the petitioner should be permitted to appear for her examination.
[Khadeejah Shahabuddin Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, Writ Petition No. 6684 of 2025, decided on 27-5-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Farhana Shah a/w. Amin Solkar, Senior Counsel, and Intern Omkar Shah, for Petitioner/Applicant in both matters.
For the Respondents: Nitin Dhumal, for Respondents 2 and 3 in Writ Petition No. 6684 of 2025; Ashok Gawai, AGP for State in Criminal Application No. 598 of 2025.
