SC questions FIR over ‘Breast Tax’ post, says CG Police should focus on major cases

Jashpur | Correspondent: The Supreme Court on Monday said police should focus on major cases rather than inconsequential ones, questioning the registration of an FIR over a social media post. 

A Bench of Justice B.V. Nagrathna and Justice R. Mahadevan heard a plea filed by social worker Rupnarayan Ekka regarding his social media post, 'Breast tax'.

Ekka had challenged the Chhattisgarh High Court's refusal to grant him anticipatory bail. 

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for Ekka, argued that the Facebook post did not contain anything criminal. He said the post only stated that the tax imposed on women for covering their breasts was introduced by a Brahmin, not by Mughal ruler Aurangzeb.

“This is not a crime,” Bhushan said.

Justice Nagarathna replied, “That is why we have agreed to hear his anticipatory bail plea.”

Bhushan said the post reflected his understanding of history. He added, “This is not an offence. That is my view of history. Maybe I am wrong, but that is what I believe.”

Justice Nagarathna remarked, “That means people have a lot of time to waste.”

During the hearing, the State's lawyer told the Court that it had issued a notice on September 9, but Ekka had not appeared before the police since then. The judges responded, “You summon him. He will appear.”

The State's lawyer then said that a notice asking Ekka to appear before the police was being issued on Monday. Bhushan also questioned why the State had not filed its response to Ekka's anticipatory bail application.

At the State's request, the Court postponed the hearing until December 4. It also extended its earlier order protecting Ekka from coercive action, such as arrest, until the next hearing.

The case began after an FIR was registered at Kunkuri police station in Jashpur district, Chhattisgarh. The FIR was filed under Sections 299 and 353(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Section 299 deals with deliberately insulting religious beliefs with the intention of hurting religious feelings. Section 353(2) deals with statements that are intended, or likely, to create hatred or hostility between communities.

According to the prosecution, Ekka posted content about Hindu women on social media on April 13, 2025, which was allegedly offensive. Deepak Mishra, chairman of the Brahmin society, later filed a complaint against him.

Ekka first approached the Chhattisgarh High Court for anticipatory bail, which means seeking protection from arrest before it happens. The High Court rejected his application on December 15, 2025.

He later filed another application, challenging the earlier order's observation that he had allegedly committed the offence after being released on bail in another case.

On July 3, the High Court rejected his second application as well. It said there had been no significant change in circumstances to justify granting him bail. The Court also noted his alleged involvement in other similar cases.

Ekka then approached the Supreme Court to challenge the High Court's decisions.

In September, the Supreme Court issued notice on his plea and ordered that no coercive action be taken against him, provided he cooperated with the investigation. The Court has now extended this protection until December 4.