On Friday, September 19, 2025, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a plea by folk singer Neha Singh Rathore to quash a First Information Report (FIR) filed against her. The singer faces accusations of fostering communal animosity and undermining national sovereignty and unity through provocative social media posts related to the tragic Pahalgam terror attack.
The Bench, comprising Justices Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi and Rajesh Singh Chauhan, rejected Ms. Rathore’s request to annul the FIR, which was initially filed against her at Lucknow’s Hazratganj police station in April. The court emphasized that while Article 19 of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression, this right is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions to uphold public order, decency, and morality.
After reviewing the Uttar Pradesh Police’s case diary, the Bench noted that Ms. Rathore’s social media posts were disseminated extensively in Pakistan and contained disparaging remarks directed at India’s Prime Minister and Union Home Minister.
The court highlighted that the singer had used the Prime Minister’s name in a ‘derogatory and disrespectful manner.’ Her comments also introduced a religious dimension and a Bihar election angle, directly accusing the Prime Minister by name and alleging that the BJP government was ‘sacrificing the lives of thousands of soldiers for its vested interest, pushing the country into war with a neighboring country.’
Furthermore, the court took into account the government counsel’s argument that the timing of Ms. Rathore’s posts was ‘critical.’ These posts were circulated immediately following the horrific Pahalgam tragedy, where 26 civilians were brutally murdered by terrorists after being identified by their Hindu faith.
The government advocate, opposing Ms. Rathore’s petition, asserted that at a juncture when national security and integrity were compromised, and the government was actively striving to stabilize the situation, the singer made social media posts ‘without proper consideration.’
The government counsel further argued, ‘A superficial examination of her tweets clearly indicates the petitioner harbors significant animosity towards the BJP and its leaders, including the Prime Minister. Her tweets delved into Bihar’s state politics, revealing ulterior motives and external influences. She claimed the BJP was eager to initiate a war, willing to sacrifice countless Army soldiers, and attempted to inject a Hindu-Muslim narrative. Consequently, the petitioner has endeavored to destabilize the fundamental social structure of the nation, where Hindus and Muslims coexist harmoniously.’
Concluding its decision, the court declared that a review of the FIR’s allegations and pertinent sections of the case diary revealed a prima facie cognizable offense against Ms. Rathore, warranting a police investigation. The court instructed Ms. Rathore to cooperate with the ongoing investigation and mandated her appearance before the Investigating Officer on September 26.