Karnataka Issues New Rules to Curb FIRs Over Social Media Posts

The Karnataka government has issued new police guidelines to prevent the automatic registration of FIRs and arrests related to social media posts. The circular mandates a preliminary inquiry before registering a case and sets a higher threshold for offences related to speech or media. It emphasizes that defamation is a non-cognizable offence, directing complainants to a magistrate instead. The guidelines also stress protecting political speech unless it incites imminent violence or public disorder.

Key Points: Karnataka Guidelines for FIRs on Social Media Posts

  • Verify complainant's legal standing
  • Mandatory preliminary inquiry for cognizable offences
  • Higher bar for speech-related cases
  • Defamation is non-cognizable
  • Protect political speech
2 min read

K'taka govt issues guidelines for registration of FIRs related to social media posts

Karnataka govt issues new police guidelines to prevent automatic FIRs and arrests for social media posts, requiring preliminary inquiries.

"No case alleging promotion of enmity... shall be registered unless there exists prima facie material disclosing incitement to violence. - Official Circular"

Bengaluru, Feb 9

The Karnataka government has introduced new guidelines to prevent the automatic registration of First Information Reports and arrests related to social media posts. These guidelines were issued through an official circular by the Director General and Inspector General of Police.

​In the circular signed by the DG and IGP M.A. Saleem, it states, "It has been observed that the police officers are registering the case relating to social media posts mechanically without undertaking preliminary enquiries as stipulated by the Supreme Court of India. The Apex court has upheld the guidelines framed by the Telangana High Court relating to the registration of FIRs in cases arising out of social media posts in the referred judgment."

​The guidelines require verification of locus standi, preliminary inquiry in cases involving cognizable offences, a higher threshold for media or speech-related offences, protection of political speech, recognition of defamation as a non-cognizable offence, adherence to established arrest protocols, prior legal review in sensitive cases, and safeguards against frivolous or motivated complaints.

​The circular states, "Before registering any FIR for alleged defamation or similar offences, the office must verify whether the complainant qualifies as the person aggrieved in terms of law. Complaints by unrelated third parties lacking standing are not maintainable, except where the report concerns a cognizable offence. Before registering a crime, the police are required to conduct a preliminary inquiry to ascertain whether the statutory ingredients of the alleged offences are prima facie made out."

The guideline further states, "No case alleging promotion of enmity, intentional insult, public mischief, threat to public order, or sedition shall be registered unless there exists prima facie material disclosing incitement to violence, hatred, or public disorder."​

"The police shall not mechanically register cases concerning harsh, offensive, or critical political speech. Only when the speech amounts to incitement to violence or poses an imminent threat to public order may criminal law be invoked. Constitutional protections for free political criticism under Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution must be scrupulously enforced," the guideline stated.

​Because defamation is a non-cognizable offence, the police are not authorised to register an FIR in such cases. Complainants must be directed to the appropriate jurisdictional magistrate. Police action is permitted only if specifically ordered by a Magistrate under Section 174(2) of the BNSS, as outlined in the guideline.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
Finally, some sense prevails! As a student, I've seen friends get anxious about posting anything critical online. The fear of a police case was real. Protecting political speech is essential for a healthy democracy. Good move by the Karnataka government.
R
Rohit P
The guidelines look good on paper, but implementation is key. Will police officers on the ground actually follow these procedures, or will there be pressure from local politicians? The circular needs to be backed by strict monitoring and accountability.
S
Sarah B
This is a balanced approach. It protects free speech but doesn't give a free pass to those who genuinely incite violence or hatred. The higher threshold for sedition-like charges is especially important. Hope it reduces the legal harassment of journalists and activists.
V
Vikram M
A much-needed clarification. Many people don't know that defamation is non-cognizable. Directing complainants to the magistrate for such issues will save police time and resources for more serious crimes. Common sense prevails, at last!
K
Karthik V
While I appreciate the intent, I have a respectful criticism. The circular says "prior legal review in sensitive cases." Who decides what is "sensitive"? This could become a loophole. The guidelines must be applied uniformly, not selectively. The devil is in the details.
M
Meera T

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50