PUCL Condemns the Arrest of Garga Chatterjee: Criminalising Political Speech Threatens Constitutional Democracy
The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) strongly condemns the arrest of activist and public intellectual Garga Chatterjee by the Cyber Crime Cell of the Kolkata Police on 12 May 2026 on the basis of allegations relating to social media posts concerning EVM functioning during the recent Assembly election period.
On 13 May 2026, Garga Chatterjee was produced before the Bankshall Court, Calcutta, where he was remanded to four days’ police custody. Reports indicate that the arrest was initiated on the basis of a complaint lodged by Election Commission authorities alleging that his social media posts regarding EVMs created misconceptions or confusion.
At the very outset PUCL clarifies that this statement is being issued without entering into the correctness or otherwise of the statements allegedly made by Garga Chatterjee, or the veracity of the allegations levelled against him by the authorities.
The present concern of PUCL is the larger constitutional issue arising from the use of arrest, police custody, and criminal prosecution in response to political speech and expression relating to matters of public and electoral importance. PUCL views this arrest as a deeply disturbing escalation in the criminalisation of political speech and democratic dissent. The use of coercive criminal process against an individual for expressing apprehensions, criticisms, or political opinions, concerning electoral processes strikes at the heart of constitutional democracy.
In a republic governed by the Constitution, citizens are not required to seek prior approval from the State before questioning institutions of power. Criticism of electoral mechanisms, including EVMs, falls squarely within the ambit of political speech protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Courts have repeatedly held that free speech includes the right to question, critique, dissent, and even express unpopular or uncomfortable opinions so long as there is no direct incitement to violence or imminent public disorder.
The allegations presently being reported against Garga Chatterjee, namely that his statements “created misconceptions”, “spread confusion”, or called for protests, are dangerously vague and constitutionally untenable grounds for arrest. Democracies cannot criminalise speech merely because it embarrasses authorities, unsettles institutions, or generates political debate. The threshold for invoking the criminal law against speech must remain exceptionally high.
Equally concerning is the invocation of police custody in a case that primarily concerns online expression. In such circumstances, the insistence on custodial interrogation raises serious questions regarding necessity, proportionality, and misuse of police powers. Arrest cannot be deployed as a punitive instrument to silence dissenters or create a chilling effect on public discourse.
PUCL is particularly alarmed by the increasing pattern across the country wherein expansive criminal law provisions and vague and sweeping allegations are being weaponised to target activists, trade unionists, journalists, academics, lawyers and political critics. Such actions erode constitutional morality and undermine public confidence in democratic institutions.
The Constitution does not envisage an obedience-based democracy. It guarantees a participatory democracy in which citizens retain the right to scrutinise and challenge the functioning of public authorities, including the Election Commission itself. Any attempt to equate criticism of electoral processes with criminal conduct is incompatible with the guarantees of liberty under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
In the light of the above, PUCL demands the immediate release of Garga Chatterjee and withdrawal of all coercive measures against him.
At a time when democratic institutions face increasing public scrutiny, the answer cannot be repression and intimidation. The answer must be transparency, accountability, and adherence to constitutional values.
PUCL reiterates that the freedom to dissent is not a threat to democracy, it is democracy itself.