DHCBA: Seeks Withdrawal of UP Police FIR Against Syed Kaif Hasan

• The DHCBA has urged the Uttar Pradesh DGP to withdraw an FIR filed by Shamli police against Delhi advocate Syed Kaif Hasan.
• The FIR, under Section 353(2) BNS, was registered over Hasan's X post claiming the Allahabad High Court reprimanded UP Police in the Ayush Malik case.
• Police deny being reprimanded and state the court did not seek a counter-affidavit, registering the FIR against Hasan and five others.
• The DHCBA's letter to DGP Rajeev Krishna on September 29 argued Hasan's post was an update awaiting a written order and warned of a 'chilling effect' on legitimate reporting.
• The association had previously condemned the UP police's action as 'highhanded and uncalled-for' in a September 21 resolution.

The DHCBA's intervention highlights the growing scrutiny on legal professionals' social media activities, particularly when reporting on judicial proceedings.

The Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) has formally requested the Uttar Pradesh Director General of Police to either withdraw or close a First Information Report (FIR) that was registered against Delhi-based advocate Syed Kaif Hasan. The FIR, lodged by Shamli police, stems from a post made by Hasan on the social media platform X concerning a recent case adjudicated by the Allahabad High Court.

Hasan's social media update reportedly asserted that the Allahabad High Court had issued a reprimand to the Uttar Pradesh Police regarding the alleged illegal confinement of a Shamli youth named Ayush Malik. Malik's detention by his family was said to have occurred following his conversion from Hinduism to Islam. The police, however, have vehemently denied the claim of being reprimanded by the High Court, subsequently initiating legal action by registering an FIR against Hasan and five other individuals.

The DHCBA's intervention highlights the growing scrutiny on legal professionals' social media activities, particularly when reporting on judicial proceedings. The association's call for the withdrawal of the FIR against Syed Kaif Hasan underscores concerns about potential overreach in response to public commentary on court matters.

In a letter dispatched to DGP Rajeev Krishna on September 29, the DHCBA articulated its position that Hasan's X post was explicitly presented as an update on ongoing proceedings, noting that the written order from the court was, at that time, still pending. While affirming that it does not intend to pre-empt any legitimate investigation, the DHCBA cautioned that such police actions could have a significant 'chilling effect' on the legitimate reporting of judicial proceedings by legal professionals.

This letter followed a resolution passed by the DHCBA on September 21, in which the association unequivocally condemned the actions taken by the Uttar Pradesh police against its member, Syed Kaif Hasan, describing them as 'highhanded and uncalled-for.' The DHCBA's stance emphasizes the importance of protecting the ability of lawyers to comment on court cases without fear of undue legal repercussions, a critical aspect of lawyer social media reporting in India.

The association's advocacy for its member, Syed Kaif Hasan, reflects a broader concern within the legal community regarding the potential for charges like those under Section 353(2) BNS to stifle open discussion and reporting on judicial matters, even when the information is presented as an update awaiting official documentation.

The Shamli Police registered the FIR under Section 353(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) against Hasan and five other individuals. This specific section pertains to offenses related to statements conducing to public mischief, such as circulating false information, rumors, or reports that may cause public alarm or communal tension. The FIR, which is recorded in Hindi, explicitly refutes the central claim made in Hasan's X post, stating that the court had not reprimanded the Shamli Police.

Furthermore, the FIR clarifies that the Allahabad High Court had not requested a counter-affidavit from the police in the Ayush Malik case. This factual dispute forms the core of the legal challenge against Hasan, highlighting the potential legal risks for lawyers reporting on judicial proceedings, particularly on social media. The incident underscores the need for legal professionals to exercise caution and verify information when commenting publicly on court matters to avoid potential charges like those under Section 353(2) BNS, and to be aware of the 'chilling effect' such actions can have on legitimate legal reporting.

This incident highlights the potential legal risks for lawyers reporting on judicial proceedings, particularly on social media. It underscores the need for legal professionals to exercise caution and verify information when commenting publicly on court matters to avoid potential charges like those under Section 353(2) BNS, and to be aware of the 'chilling effect' such actions can have on legitimate legal reporting.

Source: Original reporting via Bar and Bench