Subscribe
Subscribe
- News
- Columns
- Interviews
- Law Firms
- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
- हिंदी
- ಕನ್ನಡ
The Karnataka High Court granted anticipatory bail to a public servant who had allegedly compared the Coronavirus to the Holy Quran in a Facebook post.
The content of the Facebook post by the accused/petitioner Kusumadhara Kaniyoor reads as follows:
"Quran is danger than corona to India due to Hubli incident".
A Single Judge Bench of Justice K Natarajan was inclined to grant anticipatory bail, noting that there was no evidence to show that the petitioner's post had promoted communal violence. The order reads,
"...at this stage, it cannot be said that, there is prima-facie case made out against the petitioner for having committed any alleged offence, where it promotes the communal violence or tension between two groups of society. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, if bail is granted by imposing certain conditions, no prejudice would be caused to the case of the prosecution."
Karnataka High Court
Additionally, the Court was prompt to note that the High Court Government Pleader had not produced any material to show that the Police had obtained permission to lodge criminal prosecution against the petitioner. Relying on Supreme Court judgments, the Bench observed that sanction was required for taking cognizance by the Magistrate.
Following a complaint raised by one Mahammed Saheer against the petitioner's post, the Bellare police registered a case under Sections 153A and 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against Kaniyoor. The accused had earlier unsuccessfully approached the Sessions Court in Mangalore seeking anticipatory bail. Aggrieved by this order, he had approached the High Court.
Advocate Sachin BS argued that the petitioner was innocent, and that a false case had been registered against him, even though there is no ingredient to attract the offences under Section 153A and 505(2) of the IPC.
It was further contended that there is no element of mens rea to show that the petitioner had intended to cause any enmity between different classes of society. As the petitioner is a public servant, without obtaining permission, the question of filing the complaint and taking cognizance does not arise, added Sachin.
Countering these arguments, the government pleader submitted that the petitioner's Facebook created communal tension and the act was thus punishable under Sections 153A and 505(2) of the IPC.
It was further submitted that since the date of registration of the complaint, the petitioner has been absconding. In the event that bail is granted, there is a possibility that he may abscond, which will make the investigation process difficult, the government advocate added.
The Court, however, found no merit in the opposition's case and proceeded to grant pre-arrest bail to Kaniyoor subject to the following conditions:
Petitioner to execute a personal bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- with a surety for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer;
Petitioner shall surrender himself before the Investigating Officer within fifteen days.
Petitioner to not indulge in any similar offences nor attempt to tamper the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly;
Petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for the purpose of investigation.
[Read order here]