Journalist and PhD fellow at Jawaharlal Nehru University’s Centre for Political Studies, Sheeba Aslam Fehmi, woke up on November 30, 2013 to be informed by a friend that an FIR had been lodged against her. The friend claimed to have read about the development in newspaper reports. According to Fehmi, it took her a while to comprehend how a complaint she had lodged with the cyber-crime cell of the Delhi Police more than two years ago had resulted in an FIR against her.

In August 2011, Sheeba – a vocal advocate of women’s rights – had approached the cyber-crime cell regarding a slew of threatening emails she had received. The emails, sent from the name of “true-hearted Indian”, warned her to stop posting “anti-Indian” comments on facebook or “be prepared for consequences”. When we spoke to Sheeba, she said, “I simply forwarded the emails to the police and asked them to do the needful”.

The Delhi Police acted promptly and tracked down the laptop from which the mails were sent and the person who had sent them in a couple of months. Sheeba, however, by her own admission, was not keen on pursuing the case any further and asked the Delhi Police to do what it thought best.  That, according to Sheeba, is the last she knew of the entire issue until November 30, 2013.

The Delhi Police had pressed charges against the sender of the email, identified as Pankaj Kumar Dwivedi, under Section 66A of the IT Act. It is not clear when they filed these charges. According to Sheeba she wasn’t informed of this development. “I was not even informed by the Delhi Police that proceedings were undergoing in the court on the basis of my complaint. It’s only now that I’ve realised that my facebook posts and comments  – totally tampered and without any reference and context whatsoever – were used as evidence in the trial”.

The court, though, saw nothing wrong in the emails sent by Dwivedi – some of which are given below:

“***Warning***Warning***Warning***Warning

***Warning***Warning***Warning***Warning***

Sheeba Aslam,stop posting Anti­  Indian and

Anti ­National comments on face book. Stop immediately. Otherwise be

prepared for it’s consequences.

***Warning***Warning***Warning***Warning

***Warning***Warning***Warning***.”

 “Please allow me to come to the JNU once. I like to have a discussions with you there only. An open and fair debate is necessary to clean off all the filth and dirt from your mind and make you pure and pious so that you may loving India and its people. It is not scholarly to criticize every established institution and tradition and speak anti government or anti Indian”, Whenever, we find an opportunity. Doing such things on social sites can only be a sign of cowardice”.

The judge, Metropolitan Magistrate RK Pandey, quashing all charges against Dwivedi wrote the following in his order (of which Newslaundry has a copy):

….In my considered opinion, raising national slogans, opposing anti national sentiments and words and opposing anti establishment words and asking for fair debate on anti national sentiments of any person is no way attract the criminal law even if the words used are harsh in nature and are covered under the provisions of Fundamental Rights as provided under Article 19 of The Indian Constitution.   Further,   police has acted unilaterally on the complaint of the complainant and totally relied upon the version as produced by the complainant and acted on the complaint of the complainant without investigating the matter in fair manner  and  police  has  not  even  produced the  basic  E­mail  of the complainant in  response to which accused opposed the anti national sentiments of the complainant through his E­mail to the complainant…

The judge also directed the police to lodge a complaint against Sheeba, following which the police lodged an FIR against Sheeba under sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups), 153 B (assertions against national integration) and 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings) of the Indian Penal Code.

While Sheeba managed to get anticipatory bail, the charges against her come with a punishment of three years each. Firstpost carried a report on the incident with a headline that reads “High price of anti-Modi FB updates: Journalist faces blasphemy charges”. Our investigations however revealed that the facebook comments and posts were not just about Modi, but also on a wide range of topics from the allegedly misogynistic message that Hindu festivals like Karva Chauth and Raksha Bandhan propagate to selective caste-based outrage against rapes.

Kavita Krishnan, secretary of the All India Progressive Women’s Association, told Newslaundry that the FIR was unwarranted and the judge had overstepped the line.  Interestingly, the facebook comments and facebook post which the court has found offensive were made in 2012 and 2013 – much after Sheeba had lodged her complaint. Sheeba told us that she will challenge the order. “I have done no wrong and will continue my fight”, said Sheeba.

A bizarre situation to say the least. A citizen who feels threatened approaches the police to seek protection. Two years later she finds a case has in fact been lodged against her at the same police station. While we would like to believe our laws are meant to protect us and uphold our freedoms – freedom of speech in this instance – as guaranteed by the Constitution, the case here seemingly suggests otherwise.