CJP Questions FIR Against Woman Over Alleged Remarks on PM Modi, Says 'Since When Is Abusing a Crime?'

The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) on Friday defended a woman booked for allegedly making abusive remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi during a protest, questioning the legal basis of the FIR and arguing that offensive language alone does not amount to a criminal offence. The controversy erupted after a Zero FIR was registered at the Expressway Police Station in Noida against the woman over a viral video allegedly showing her using objectionable language against the Prime Minister during a CJP protest held at Delhi's Jantar Mantar on July 23. As the incident occurred in Delhi, the case has since been transferred to the Delhi Police for further investigation.

Responding to the FIR, CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke questioned whether abusive speech, by itself, constitutes a criminal offence under Indian law. "Since when is abusing a crime?" Dipke said while criticizing the action against the woman. He also alleged that abusive language has often been used in political discourse by supporters of different parties, asking why similar legal action is not taken in those cases.

The CJP leader further claimed that individuals who openly use abusive language against women on social media have not faced comparable legal consequences. According to him, the law should be applied uniformly rather than selectively against political opponents. The FIR was reportedly registered following a complaint after the video circulated widely online. Authorities have invoked provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), and the matter is now under investigation by the Delhi Police.

The incident has sparked a wider debate over the limits of free speech and political expression. Legal experts note that while abusive language may be offensive, courts have previously distinguished between vulgar speech and conduct that amounts to a punishable criminal offence. Whether the remarks attract criminal liability will depend on the specific facts of the case and the provisions invoked during the investigation.

The controversy has also triggered political reactions, with CJP leaders accusing the government of using criminal proceedings to suppress dissent, while supporters of the FIR argue that personal attacks on constitutional officeholders should not be normalized in public discourse. The case remains under investigation, and no final determination has yet been made on the allegations against the woman.