India A Secular Country, Mandatory Jailtime Needed For Promoting Enmity On Religious Lines: Kerala HC Remarks In PC George's Anticipatory Bail Plea

The Court made these remarks while considering the anticipatory bail application of former MLA PC George, booked for allegedly making hate speech against the Muslim community during a channel debate.

The crime was registered against PC George alleging the commission of offences punishable under sections 196(1)(a), Section 299 of the BNS and Section 120 (o) (penalty for causing nuisance and violation of public order) Kerala Police Act.

The Court was referring to Section 196(1)(a) (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion etc), and 299 (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) of the BNS, both of which, prescribe a punishment of imprisonment up to 3 years, or with fine or both. It is to be noted that corresponding provisions in the IPC, that is, Section 153A and 295A carry similar penalties.

The Court orally stated that the Parliament should have removed the 'or with fine' option in the BNS, for offences that promote enmity on grounds of religion.

Justice P V Kunhikrishnan stated that India is a secular country and people should not be using caste and religion to promote enmity between different groups. Referring to the punishment in Sections 196(1)(a) and 299, the Court orally said that even repeated offenders can get away by merely paying a fine. 

“First offender he can escape with fine, second offender he can escape with fine…there are sections in which second offence is given higher punishment there right?….According to me mandatory jail sentence is necessary, if there is offence, not in this case…mandatory jail sentence is necessary especially we India is a secular country…”

Senior Counsel P. Vijayabhanu, appearing for PC George submitted that he did not intentionally make statements or speeches promoting hatred or ill will against the Muslim community, rather he was provoked during the channel debate, for which he has apologised also.

The State opposing the bail application submitted that PC George had made such provocative statements against the Muslim community even earlier also, without any provocation, which showed his clear intention. It was pointed out disharmony does not happen at once, but such provocative statements remain in the minds of the people and enmity and disharmony develop over a period of time.

Earlier, the Court expressed its disinclination to grant anticipatory bail to PC George citing his repeated disregard of the orders of the Magistrate Court as well as that of the High Court. He had been granted bail in similar cases on the condition that he would refrain from making provocative statements, which he failed to adhere to.

After hearing the arguments today, the Court has reserved the matter for orders.

Case Title: P C George v State of Kerala

Case No: Bail Appl. 1874/2025