'Every Act Of Disruption Of Public Order Will Not Amount To Offence Of Waging War' : Haryana Court In Dera Violence Case [Read Order]

Judge Sanjay Sandhir of Additional District and Sessions Court Panchkula said,

"as per the planning of the alleged meeting dated 17.08.2017, the object was of private nature and the primary object was to gather the devotees in large numbers for favourable decision for Baba and in case the decision was given against Baba, it was allegedly planned to carry out rioting, arson and to attack the police to get the Baba freed from police custody. The object was thus confined to the interest of the Dera followers/ devotees and not common to the whole community and the object sought to be attained was not of a great public nature."

Honeypreet was a prime accused in the violence that broke out in Panchkula after conviction of the Dera Chief in rape cases by the CBI Court at Panchkula.

Allegedly, she had conspired to incite violence in Panchkula following Rahim's conviction. In a complaint lodged by a journalist namely Sanjiv Mahajan it was alleged that in a committee meeting of Dera, presided by Honeypreet and Aditya Insan, they planned to instigate Dera devotees, gathered at different places, to burn buildings, vehicles and damage the Government buildings so that Government comes to know about their power. Subsequently, when Baba was convicted their plan was executed.

Accordingly, charges were framed against Honeypreet and other Dera followers under provisions of IPC, related to unlawful assembly, criminal conspiracy, waging of war against India etc.

Adopting a "balanced and realistic approach", the court noted that an essential ingredient viz. 'intention' to wage war was missing from the accused persons' acts . It said,

"In cases involving offences under sections 121, 121-A IPC the most important element is the intention and purpose behind the defiance or uprising against the Government and the object and intention must be to attain by use of criminal force and violence an object of general public nature striking directly against the Government Authority. Till the judgment was pronounced by the CBI Court, Panchkula against Baba there was no use of any criminal force by the devotees/ followers to overawe the Government."

Reliance was placed on State of NCT Delhi v. Navjot Sandhu, (2005) 11 SCC 600, wherein the Apex Court had clarified that unlawful assemblies, riots insurrections are offences which run into each other and in all the said offence normal tranquility of society is disturbed but the expression waging war will not include all the acts of disruption of public peace and order irrespective of their magnitude and repercussion.

Reference was also made to the ruling in Jamiludin Nasir v. State of West Bengal, 2014 (7) SCC 443, whereby the Supreme Court cautioned the courts against treating every act of lawlessness as an act of waging war. It had said therein,

"The Court must be cautious in adopting an approach which has the effect of bringing within the fold of Section 121 all acts of lawless near and violent acts resulting in destruction of public property, etc.

xxx

The expression 'waging war' should not be stretched too far to hold that all acts of disrupting public order and peace irrespective of their magnitude and repercussions could be reckoned as acts of 'waging war' against the government."

Accordingly, the charges for Sedition under Sections 121 and 121-A IPC were dropped. However, the case has been sent back to the CJM court, where it will come up for hearing on November 6, in relation to the remaining offences under Sections 145, 146, 150, 151, 152, 153, 120-B, 120, 216, 201 of IPC.

"The accused are discharged from the offences punishable under Sections 121 and 121-A IPC. Since the remaining offences are triable by the Magistrate, therefore, the present case is sent back to learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula for further proceedings in accordance with law," the court said.

Honeypreet was represented by Advocates Tanveer Ahmed Mir and Dhruv Gupta and the State by District Attorney Pankaj Raj Garg and PP Meera Garwa.

Click here to download order