Recently, the Bombay High Court while quashing criminal proceedings against Bollywood actor Salman Khan arising from a 2019 complaint by a journalist alleging criminal intimidation. The single bench noted, the judicial process should not be a means to harass an accused just because he is a well-known celebrity

Justice Bharati Dangre opined that celebrities should not be subject to unnecessary oppression.

“The judicial process need not be a means for needless harassment merely because the Accused is a well-known celebrity and without adhering to the procedure of law, he shall not be subjected to unnecessary oppression at the hands of a complainant, who set in the machinery into motion to satisfy his vendetta and assumed that he was insulted by the cine star,” the order stated.

In the said matter, Salman Khan along bodyguard approaches the High Court challenging a summoning order passed on the complaint of a journalist. The complainant claimed that he spotted Khan riding a bicycle on the streets of Mumbai and asked his bodyguards for permission to film the actor. On obtaining consent, the complainant started recording Khan,

The journalist claimed that Khan snatched his phone from him and deleted data from it.

Based on the “positive police report” under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and other material, the magistrate found sufficient grounds to proceed against Khan.

The magistrate observed that offences under Section 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), 506 (criminal intimidation) of  Indian Penal Code had been made out against Khan, and summoned him to personally remain present in court. 

The High Court had stayed this order in April 2022. Khan also sought quashing of the complaint against him.

According to Justice Dangre was the invocation of Sections 504 and 506 of IPC without being satisfied about the ingredients. 

“The words uttered in despair or a gesture, however frightful, by itself would not attract Section 504. The allegations against Khan in the complaint, apart from being an afterthought, in no case met the necessary ingredients of Sections 504 and 506, which would have warranted the Magistrate to take cognizance upon a complaint,” the Court held. 

The judge proceeded to quash the orde,r noting that issuance of process against Khan and continuation of proceedings against him would be “nothing short of abuse of the process”.