Chanting Bharat Mata ki Jai is not hate speech and can by no stretch of imagination be considered as promoting disharmony or enmity amongst religions, the Karnataka High Court recently said while quashing a first information report (FIR) registered against five men under Section 153A of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Single-judge Justice M Nagaprasanna granted relief to the five accused booked for allegedly promoting enmity between different groups and indulging in acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.
“In the light of the afore-narrated facts and the judgments extracted supra, permitting even investigation into the case at hand would be prima facie permitting investigation into the sloganeering of Bharath Matha Ki Jai inter alia, which can by no stretch of imagination be promoting disharmony or enmity amongst religions,” the Court said while quashing the FIR.
The five residents of Ullal taluk in Karnataka were booked by the police in June this year.
As per the order, the petitioners were on June 9 returning from an event celebrating the oath ceremony of Prime Minister Narendra Modi when they were attacked by a group of people.
The petitioners alleged that they were questioned by the group and assaulted and stabbed as they had been chanting “Bharat mata ki jai.”
The petitioners then approached the police and registered a complaint, but the next day, an FIR was registered against them under several provisions of the IPC, including Section 153A that penalises promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion, race and place of birth.
The FIR was registered following a complaint made by a Muslim man who alleged that the petitioners had threatened him.
However, Justice Nagaprasanna said that this was a case of a counter blast to the complaint that had been registered by the petitioners.
The judge further said that not a single ingredient of Section 153A was met in the case.
"Section 153A makes it an offence if enmity is promoted between different groups of religion. The present case is a classic illustration of misuse of Section 153A of the IPC. It is a case of counterblast to a complaint registered by these petitioners. The defence is that the petitioners were shouting Bharath Matha Ki Jai and praising the Prime Minister of the nation. The allegation by the complainant does not even refer to any of those things. To protect the skin of the complainant and others, the skin of the petitioners is sought to be ripped off. It does not meet even a single ingredient of Section 153A of the IPC. A pure case of counterblast is sought to be projected as a crime under Section 153A of the IPC. The ingredients that are necessary to bring home the complaint under Section 153A need not detain this Court for long or delve deep into the matter,” the High Court said.
Hence, it quashed the FIR against the petitioners.
Senior Advocate M Aruna Shyam and advocate Suyog Herale E appeared for the petitioners.
Additional SPP B N Jagadeesh represented the State.
[Read Order]