“Freedom of speech and expression cannot be allowed to be transgressed beyond reasonableness,” the Court said in a case concerning the termination of an employee for putting up FB provocative posts against a company.

The Bombay High Court recently noted that freedom of speech and expression must not be permitted to exceed reasonable bounds or it may have disastrous results.

When handling a case involving the firing of an employee by a car company for posting offensive Facebook comments critical of the company, Justice Milind Jadhav made the observation. On December 12, 2023, the employee’s termination was overturned by a labor court order that was overturned by the judge. The High Court concluded that exercising one’s right to free speech cannot be done in an irrational way.

“Freedom of speech and expression cannot be allowed to be transgressed beyond reasonableness. If that is allowed, it could lead to disastrous consequences. In a given case, one cannot and should not wait for the consequences to occur. Such acts itself are required to be nipped in the bud. Otherwise, it would convey a wrong signal to society at large,” the High Court said.

The employee’s termination had been overturned by a labor court earlier, and Hitachi Astemo Fie, the employer, then appealed the labor court’s decision to the High Court.

Hitachi asserted that during a dispute over a pay settlement, the worker, Kadu, had made two posts from his Facebook account. Hitachi asserted that these posts were disparaging, damaged the company’s brand, and incited staff members to rebel against the management of the business. After Kadu was found guilty of misconduct in 2018 by the company’s inquiry officer (EO), his employment was terminated by an order dated May 2, 2018. On May 31, 2018, Kadu challenged the termination order in Pune’s labor court, which invalidated it. The Labour Court further declared that the investigation into Kadu

Hitachi challenged this order before the High Court in 2023. Kadu opposed the company’s plea, arguing that no untoward or violent incident had taken place, even though there had been provocative comments on the posts.  Justice Jadhav opined that it was no defence to say that no untoward incident took place after the provocative posts were uploaded.

“Considering the fact that Hitachi employed thousands of workmen, such posts and the comments thereof, when read by any disgruntled workman, could have led to any disorderly act. When it was admitted that wage settlement talks were going on for several months, a much greater degree of restraint was called upon to be exercised by the office bearers of the recognized union who hold active parleys with the company,” the Court observed. 

The Court further found that the Facebook posts were provocative and clearly intended to incite hatred against the company, as evident from comments on the post. The Court added that such acts by office-bearers of a workers’ union could not be pardoned. 

“If the same office bearers of the recognized union themselves do not practice restraint and have faith in the statutory provisions of law and commit such an act by posting posts that invoke hatred and are by themselves provocatory, such acts cannot / should not be pardoned. A strong message needs to be sent out against such acts,” Justice Jadhav emphasized.

Therefore, the Court allowed the company’s plea and set aside the labour court’s order. The labour court was directed to complete hearing certain pending issues in the matter within eight months’ time.