'Smash brahminical patriarchy:' FIR against Twitter CEO Dorsey quashed
Over a year after Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was seen holding a poster bearing the slogan ‘Smash Brahminical Patriarchy’, the Rajasthan High Court on Tuesday (April 7) quashed an FIR filed against him and disposed of the plea seeking his arrest for allegedly hurting sentiments of the Brahmin community.
The court said it could not find any offence against Dorsey and Anna MM Vetticad, the journalist who had posted the photo on Twitter. It added that allowing an investigation by the police in the matter was absolutely uncalled for, said Nishant Bora, counsel for Dorsey and Vetticad.
Allowing the miscellaneous petitions by Dorsey and Vetticad, Justice Sandeep Mehta said, “I am of the opinion that allowing investigation in the matter to be continued is absolutely uncalled for. The court also observed that the FIR did not disclose necessary ingredients of any cognizable offence to warrant its registration and investigation.”
During Twitter CEO @jack's visit here, he & Twitter's Legal head @vijaya took part in a round table with some of us women journalists, activists, writers & @TwitterIndia's @amritat to discuss the Twitter experience in India. A very insightful, no-words-minced conversation ? pic.twitter.com/LqtJQEABgV
— Anna MM Vetticad (@annavetticad) November 18, 2018
In November 2018, Raj Kumar Sharma, a resident of Jodhpur, lodged a complaint with the police, alleging that a poster held by Dorsey was bearing the slogan ‘Smash Brahminical Patriarchy’ and it had hurt the sentiments of the community.
Referring to the phrase ascribed as offensive, the court said these words could not be construed as having any direct link with the religious sentiment of any section of society.
The words in the poster best convey the feelings of the concerned person regarding being strongly opposed to the Brahminical patriarchal system and desirous of denouncing the same, the court said.
Dorsey and Vetticad had moved court with a criminal miscellaneous petition praying quashing of the FIR. In December last year, the court did not quash the FIR but stayed the arrest.
(With inputs from agencies)
