Not Offence U/S 505(2) IPC: Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Journalist For Reporting On Differences Between Police Departments In Solapur
Publishing news reports about friction between police officers from different departments doesn't amount to creating ill-will among classes as defined under section 505(2) of the IPC. "If we will say that any news article pertaining to two Sections of any Department will fall within the purview of Section 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code, in that case, we are interpreting the...
Publishing news reports about friction between police officers from different departments doesn't amount to creating ill-will among classes as defined under section 505(2) of the IPC.
"If we will say that any news article pertaining to two Sections of any Department will fall within the purview of Section 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code, in that case, we are interpreting the provisions of Section 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code too far and it is not expected by legislatures. Hence, we are not inclined to accept the submissions made on behalf of the prosecution. We reject it."
Observing thus the division bench of Justices PB Varale and Shreeram Modak quashed the FIR registered for offences under sections 500 (defamation), 501 (Printing defamatory matter), 502 (Sale of printed substance containing defamatory matter), 505(2) (Statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes) of the IPC against reporter Amol Vyavhare for two articles in a newspaper in Solapur, Dainik Pudhari in 2017 and 2018.
The then deputy commissioner was the complaint in the case as filed the complaint as the news articles were about the staff from her department in one hand and staff attached to Crime Branch of Solapur Unit on the other.
The court noted that the ingredients of 505(2) of the IPC are that the publication of the article must be with the "intent to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever" and "feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities," were not prevalent in the present case.
The prosecutor representing the Solapur Police argued that the article need not pertain to two religions and even if it pertains to the employees of one Establishment, still it would be an offence under 505(2) of the IPC.
However, the bench noted that both judgements -Amish Devgan and Bilal Ahmad Kaloo - which were cited by the prosecution had a mention of religion.
And while it was true that by reading those two news articles, any person from the society will certainly form an opinion that there is a rift in between the police personnel of two offices, and it wouldn't give a good message about overall functioning of the Police Commissionerate Office, Solapur, moreover it will create an alarm, it did not have ingredients of 505(2) of the IPC.
Regarding the invocation of section 500 of the IPC, the court noted that the procedure prescribed under section 199 of the CrPC was not followed.
Case Title: Amol Kashinath Vyavhare Versus Purnima Chaugule Shrirangi And Others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 180