Insult To Religion Made Carelessly Without Any Malicious Intent Would Not Be Offence U/S 295A IPC: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that insults to religion "made unwittingly or carelessly without any malicious or deliberate intent" would not be an offence under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code.

The Court said, "It needs to be reiterated that Section 295A of the IPC does not penalize any and every act of insult or an attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of a person or a community but it penalizes only those acts of insults or attempts which have been perpetrated with a deliberate and malicious intent so as to outrage the religious feelings of a particular class/community."

These observations were made while hearing a plea to quash the FIR filed under Sections 295A and 153A of the IPC against a Granthi of a Gurudwara, for allegedly hurting the feelings of the Valmik community. In the book titled 'Barah Maha Majh (Steek),' Lord Valmik was referred to as Ratnakar and allegedly his life was presented in a distorted manner.

The counsel representing the petitioner contended that while reading a book, petitioner noticed some remarks made therein about Lord Valmik, which he then brought to the notice of the complainant. He further submitted that petitioner was neither the publisher nor the author, yet the FIR was lodged against him.

Considering the submissions the Court said, "it is nothing but preposterous" to interpret that portion of the Book which was allegedly hurting the feelings of the community, was malicious or derogatory to any community or sect.

"Even as per historical books and ancient scriptures, Maharishi Valmik was born as Ratnakar, before he attained enlightenment; while in meditative penance, eons passed and he remained in eternal bliss and trance, oblivious of the ant hill that had engulfed his entire body, thereby getting the name of Valmik," observed the Court.

The Court also noted that FIR against publisher and author of the book had already been quashed.

Stating that a bare reading of the FIR reveals that no allegations have been levelled against the petitioner, much less of distorting any facts relating to the life of Maharishi Valmik or he having intentionally circulated or distorted information about Maharishi Valmik, the Court quashed the FIR.

Appearance: Harpinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Pankaj Khullar, AAG, Punjab. None for respondent No.2.

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 182