The Supreme Court on Friday quashed a first information report filed by the Gujarat Police against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi over a poem he posted on social media, Live Law reported.

A bench of Justices Abhay Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan observed that no offence was made out and underscored the importance of protecting the freedom of speech and expression.

“Free expression of thoughts and views by individuals or groups of individuals is an integral part of a healthy civilized society,” Live Law quoted the bench as saying. “Without freedom of expression of thoughts and views, it is impossible to lead a dignified life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.”

The court added: “In a healthy democracy, the views of thoughts expressed by an individual or group of individuals must be countered by expressing another point of view.”

Pratapgarhi is known for his protest poetry that details the Muslim experience and identity in India and other parts of the world.

On January 3, the Rajya Sabha MP was booked by the Jamnagar Police in Gujarat on charges of promoting enmity between groups based on religion and race, making statements harmful to national integration and insulting religious groups by posting the poem along with a video, which was widely shared on social media.

“Even if a large number of persons dislike the views expressed by another, the right of person to express the views must be respected and protected,” the bench said on Friday, adding that literature makes life “more meaningful”.

During a hearing on March 3, the Supreme Court had said that the poem posted by Pratapgarhi propagated a message of non-violence and that the police should have shown sensitivity.

“It has nothing to do with religion, this has nothing to do with any anti-national activity,” Oka had said at the time. “Police has shown lack of sensitivity.”

When Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Gujarat government, said that some people may have understood the meaning of the poem differently, Oka had said that “now nobody has any respect for creativity”.

“If you read it [poem] plainly, it says that even if you suffer injustice, you suffer it with love,” the judge had said.

Lawyer Kapil Sibal, representing Pratapgarhi, had urged the bench during the hearing to review and make observations about the judgement issued by the Gujarat High Court in the matter.

On January 17, the High Court refused to quash the FIR citing the need for further investigation and Pratapgarhi’s alleged non-cooperation with the police. The court had said that the poem’s content could disturb social harmony, noting that citizens, particularly MPs, must act in ways that preserve communal and social peace.

On Friday, the Supreme Court said that the courts are duty-bound to “uphold and enforce” the fundamental rights, Live Law reported.

“Sometimes we the judges may not like spoken or written words but still it is our duty to uphold the fundamental rights under Article 19(1),” the bench was quoted as saying. “We judges are also under an obligation to uphold the constitution and respective ideals.”

The Supreme Court also said that police officers must abide by the Constitution and “respect the ideals”.

The top court had earlier granted interim relief to Pratapgarhi, staying all further actions related to the FIR.