On Thursday the Supreme Court quashed a criminal case against Professor Javed Ahmed Hajam, highlighting the crucial role of freedom of speech and expression in a democratic society. The case centered around Professor Hajam's WhatsApp status, wherein he criticized the abrogation of Article 370, which ended the special status of Jammu and Kashmir.

The bench, comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, emphasized the fundamental right of every Indian citizen to express dissent and criticism against state actions. The judgment underscored that describing the day of abrogation as a 'Black Day' is a legitimate expression of protest and anguish, protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.

The Maharashtra Police had registered a case against Professor Hajam under Section 153-A, accusing him of promoting enmity between different groups and acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony. However, the court dismissed the charges, asserting that the professor's WhatsApp messages did not intend to incite disharmony or feelings of enmity.

The court's ruling holds significant implications for the preservation of democracy, as it categorically stated that if criticisms are treated as offenses, the essence of democracy would be jeopardized. It recognized the intrinsic value of dissent and protest as essential features of the Indian Constitution.

The judgment further clarified that expressing individual views and reactions to government actions, even if critical, fall within the ambit of freedom of speech. Professor Hajam's messages were deemed a form of protest and an exercise of his constitutionally guaranteed right to express his opinions.

Notably, the court also addressed Professor Hajam's message wishing Pakistanis on their Independence Day, stating that such expressions of goodwill towards citizens of other countries are well within the rights of Indian citizens. The ruling reinforces the idea that extending good wishes on foreign nations' independence days does not constitute an offense.