Madhya Pradesh High Court: In the suo moto writ petition registered by the Court regarding the incident wherein a person belonging to the OBC community was allegedly forced to wash the feet of an upper caste person and drink that water by the villagers, the Division Bench of Vivek Agarwal and Avanindra Kumar Singh, JJ., asked State why and on what basis were the accused detained under the National Security Act, 1980 (‘NSA’), without receiving the signed Court order.
Background
The accused was allegedly found drunk in the village, and he sold liquor in the village despite a self-prohibition in the village imposed by the Panchayat. Reportedly, the accused was fined by the Gram Panchayat, Satariya. Thereafter, the victim, a member of the OBC Community, allegedly used artificial intelligence and created a meme showing the accused with a garland of footwear around his neck. Upon objections by members of the general community, the victim deleted the meme. However, a Panchayat gathering decided on its own that the victim must atone for his act of indiscretion. Thus, the victim was called to the village temple, encircled by a large mob, and compelled to wash the feet of the accused and consume that water. One of them was heard telling that the victim must state that he shall serve the upper caste community. YouTube News Channels reported this incident.
Later, the YouTube news channels uploaded videos wherein the victim said that certain interested parties were trying to make a mountain out of a molehill and that the accused had been his Guru for a long time.
While taking cognizance of the last date, the Court noted that the latter videos, prima facie, reflected from the eye movements of the victim that he was reading out something placed in front of him.
The Court further noted that the Damoh Police had registered an FIR against the accused persons under Section 296 (this Court was unable to understand how Section 296 would be applicable) and 196 (1)(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’), for which the maximum punishment is three years. However, the Court opined that as the entire incident took place in the premises of the temple, Section 196(2) would also apply.
The Court remarked that though no vocal threats were given to the victim, the environment was such that he was surrounded by several people and had no option but to state and do as he was directed by the mob. By necessary implication, prima facie, an offence under Section 351 of the BNS was evident; thus, the Court directed the Police to add Sections 351 and 133 of the BNS to the FIR.
The Court stated that, “repeated instances of caste-related violence and discriminative actions in the State of Madhya Pradesh is shocking. This is the same State where a person of the general category urinated on the head of a tribal person, and to placate whom, the then Chief Minister washed the feet of the victim. Caste identities are on the rise. Every community frequently and shamelessly flaunts its caste identity to the detriment of the entire Hindu Society. Each caste has become vociferous and ultra-conscious of its caste identity and leaves no measure unturned to demonstrate his/her pride of belonging to a particular caste. This is giving rise to several instances of caste violence. The victims in most cases are the least literate and most impoverished economically. The incident of the shoe being thrown at the Chief Justice of India, the suicide committed by a Senior Additional Director General of Police in Haryana, are instances of such caste related issues gaining prominence in this country. If one is unfortunate to follow social media or read the newspaper, the Hindu is conspicuous by his absence. Persons refer to themselves as Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras, each asserting their independent identity. At this stage, if things are unchecked, within a century and a half, the people, who call themselves Hindus, will cease to exist, fighting amongst themselves.”
Underscoring that, though it was executive discretion to direct the Police to proceed against these accused people under the NSA, the Court held that with the building resentment within the people of the community from which the victim hails, if action was not taken immediately, such situations might lead to violence where police action thereafter would become ineffective.
Thus, the Court directed the Police and the Damoh Administration to proceed against all the persons who were visible in the video and whose identity can be ascertained, who surrounded the victim and compelled him to do the act under the NSA (in addition to the FIR).
It was contended that five persons, including the main accused, had been arrested without proper scrutiny, and the NSA could not have been invoked.
Analysis
At the outset, the Court noted that as per the report of the Superintendent of Police(‘SP’), Section 3(2) of the NSA had been invoked against five persons along with the FIR lodged under Sections 196(2), 352, and 351(2) of the BNS. Noting this, the Court remarked that evidently, the SP took cognizance of the offence on oral orders of the Court without a signed copy of the previous order dated 14-10-2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench and the formal registration of the present writ petition.
Without delving into the merits of the previous order, the Court provided certain issues that had to be answered by the State, which are as follows:
-
What action has been taken against the Sarpanch and Secretary of the Gram Panchayat who had allegedly convened a meeting to admonish the victim?
-
What material was produced before the SP, and what was his take on the said material, to invoke provisions of the NSA?
-
Whether, without getting a certified copy of the order dated 14-10-2025 and registration of the writ petition, SP was acting in a bona fide manner to pass the aforementioned report/communication invoking the NSA?
The Court directed the District Magistrate and SP to file affidavits by 16-10-2025, explaining what material was placed before them and what was the basis to appreciate it before passing orders of detention on 14-10-2025 itself.
Lastly, the Court issued notice to YouTube Channels of Satya Hindi-MP, Punjab Kesari, and Lallantop seeking their response as to the correctness of the material put on their social media platforms.
Thereafter, the matter was listed for 17-10-2025. On the said date, fresh notices were issued to Navbharat Times, Lallantop, and Satya Hindi.
The matter was listed for 28-10-2025.
Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.
[Court on its own Motion v. Director General of Police (M.P), 2025 SCC OnLine MP 7713, decided on 15-10-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the petitioner: Senior Advocate Naman Nagrath and Advocate Praneet Nagrath
For the respondent: Additional Advocate General Janhavi Pandit