Mere "Religiously Compromised" Expression Not Offence U/S 295A IPC, Intentional Insult Provoking Breach Of Peace Essential: Punjab & Haryana HC

The Punjab and Haryana High has held that merely making "religiously compromised" statements is not an act sufficient for the Magistrate court to take cognizance of offence under Section 295A IPC.

The provision criminalizes deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion.

Justice Sandeep Moudgil said that to constitute the offence, the accused must cause "intentional insult" of such degree that it provokes a person to break the public peace or to commit any other offence.

"The intentional insult must be of such a degree that should provoke a person to break the public peace or to commit any other offence. The person who intentionally insults intending or knowing it to be likely that it will give provocation to any other person and such provocation will cause to break the public peace or to commit any other offence, in such a situation, the ingredients of Sections 295-A and 504 are satisfied. One of the essential elements constituting the offence is that there should have been an act or conduct amounting to intentional insult and the mere fact that the accused hurled such religiously-compromised expressions to directly hurt the sentiments of the Sikh community, as such, is not sufficient by itself for this Court to direct the Magistrate to take cognizance of the same."

The bench was referring to alleged statements made by singer Gurdas Maan, claiming Laddi Shah is the descendant of third Sikh Guru, Sri Guru Amar Dass.

Court refused to set-aside Punjab Police's cancellation report in the matter. It said religious belief is a matter of "subjective acceptance" and Courts must leave its construction to the followers, unless it is against a public policy or any statutory or constitutional provisions.

In the instant case, Court said Maan's demeanour did not reflect "intention" to outrage the religious sentiments and feelings of any community. He did not force any person to accept Laddi Shah to be a Sikh Guru.

Consequently, Court said it didn't find any valid reason to interfere with trial court's order inasmuch as none of the essential ingredients to make out a case under Section 295-A IPC viz. (i) malicious & deliberate intention, (ii) outrage, (iii) insult or attempts to insult, (iv) the religion or the religious belief of that class- were shown.

Mr Ramandeep Singh Gill, Advocate and

Mr. Jatin Bansal Kotshamir, Advocate for petitioners

Mr. ADS Sukhija, Addl. AG Punjab and Mr. JS Rattu, DAG Punjab

Harjinder Singh @ Jinda & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

2024 LiveLaw (PH) 231

Click here to read/download the order