Shouting 'Jai Sriram' Inside Mosque Doesn't Outrage Religious Feelings: Karnataka High Court Quashes Case

Quashing a case against two men accused of an offence under IPC Section 295A for allegedly shouting 'Jai Sriram' in a mosque, the Karnataka High Court said it was not understandable how the slogan would outrage the religious feelings of any class.

This the high court said after noting that the complainant in the case had himself said that Hindus and Muslims were living in harmony in the concerned area. It further said that as no ingredients of the offences alleged were made out, permitting further proceedings against the petitioners would become an abuse of process of law. The two men were booked under various IPC offences including Sections 447(Punishment for criminal trespass), 505(Statements conducing to public mischief), 506(Punishment for criminal intimidation), 34 (common intention) and 295A.

Taking note of IPC Section 295A a single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna in its order observed, "Section 295A deals with deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs. It is ununderstandable as to how if someone shouts 'Jai Sriram' it would outrage the religious feeling of any class. When the complainant himself states that Hindu – Muslims are living in harmony in the area the incident by no stretch of imagination can result in antimony".

The high court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Mahendra Singh Dhoni v Yerraguntla Shyamsundar (2017) and said that the apex court had held that any and every act will not become an offence under Section 295A of the IPC and the acts which have "no effect on bringing out peace or destruction of public order" will not lead to an offence under the provision.

With respect to allegation of Section 505 the high court observed that there was no allegation that the alleged incident has caused public mischief or any rift. On Section 506 the high court said that the complaint itself narrates that the complainant had not seen the person who allegedly committed the offence of criminal intimidation under IPC Section 506.

The prosecution had alleged that on September 24, 2023, at about 10.50 p.m some unknown persons barged into the Masjid and shouted slogans saying 'Jai Sriram” and alleged to have threatened that they will not leave the community. The complaint named unknown persons but while conducting investigation, the petitioners were drawn as accused in the case. The petitioners moved the high court seeking quashing of the registration of the crime.

The petitioners argued that none of the ingredients that are necessary for the allegations are present in the case. The offence, under Section 447 of the IPC which deals with criminal trespass is not made out as a Masjid is a public place and entry into it cannot mean a criminal trespass, they said.

The prosecution sought to dismiss the plea saying the petitioners cannot enter into the Masjid and shout 'Jai Sriram' or threaten the muthavalli. It was contended that the least the matter requires is an investigation.

The high court noted that the complaint had narrated that "Hindus and Muslims in the jurisdiction" of the concerned police station are "living in great harmony and these persons who have shouted 'Jai Sriram' are creating a rift between the communities". With respect to offences alleged under Sections 503 and 447 the high court said that the complaint "nowhere even remotely touches upon" the ingredients of the two offences in the case.

It thereafter said, “Finding no ingredients of any of the offences so alleged, permitting further proceedings against these petitioners would become an abuse of the process of law and result in miscarriage of justice".

Allowing the plea, the high court quashed the criminal proceedings pending before the trial court.

Case Title: Keerthan Kumar & Anr AND State of Karnataka

Counsel for Petitioner: Advocate Sachin B S

Counsel for Respondent: HCGP Sowmya R

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 438

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 25591 OF 2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order