Sandeep sharma: Justice Quashes FIR Against Thakar Singh Bharmouri

By Ananya Rao / 04.04.2026

“Interestingly, the person, who was allegedly intentionally insulted by the petitioner, thereby being provoked to breach the public peace or commit any other offence, never came forward to lodge a complaint…” These words from Justice Sandeep Sharma of the Himachal Pradesh High Court highlight the court’s recent decision to quash a First Information Report (FIR) against Thakar Singh Bharmouri.

The FIR was filed following an email complaint by a member of the Bharatiya Janta Party, concerning remarks made by Bharmouri during an election rally on October 3, 2021. The complaint alleged that Bharmouri had made derogatory comments about Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Justice Sharma emphasized that the accusations lacked specificity, stating, “No material worth credence has been adduced on record to suggest that petitioner intentionally, with a view to cause public disruption, hurled abuses and made uncalled for remarks against the Hon’ble Prime Minister.” This ruling underscores the court’s stance on the necessity of concrete evidence in such cases.

The court further noted that the essential elements required to invoke Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code were absent. Justice Sharma remarked, “…there is no allegation that while using absurd language and hurling abuses at the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India, petitioner ever attempted to promote enmity or hatred between different classes of citizens of India on the grounds of religion, race, caste, community or language…”

In its ruling, the court also highlighted the importance of protecting the judicial process from misuse, stating, “The High Court’s inherent power under Section 528 must be exercised to prevent the judicial process from being used as a weapon of harassment in cases where a conviction is highly unlikely.”

As a result of the court’s decision, Bharmouri has been formally acquitted of the charges against him. This ruling may set a precedent for similar cases in the future, emphasizing the need for clear and specific allegations in political contexts.

The implications of this ruling extend beyond Bharmouri, potentially affecting how political speech is treated in legal contexts in India. The court’s insistence on evidence and specificity may deter frivolous complaints in the future.

Details remain unconfirmed regarding any potential appeals or further actions by the parties involved following this ruling.