"Offence Against Great Nation" : Bengaluru Court Awards 5-Yr Jail Term To Student Who 'Celebrated' Pulwama Attack

The Bengaluru Court on Monday sentenced a 21-year-old engineering student to 5-Year imprisonment for 'Celebrating' the Pulwama Attack by posting derogatory comments on FB supporting the acts of terrorists with the intention to disrupt the sovereignty and integrity of India.

The Special NIA Court presided over by Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge Gangadhara C. M. found that the prosecution had adduced cogent and convincing evidence to prove that the accused had in fact made derogatory posts on his Facebook account, celebrating the suicide attack made on the Indian C.R.P.F. Jawans at Pulwama.

"The accused has not made derogatory comments one or two times. He made the comments to all the posts made by all the news channels on facebook. Moreover, he was not an illiterate or ordinary man. He was an engineering student at the time of commission of the offence and he made the posts and comments intentionally on his facebook account. He felt happy about killing of the great souls and celebrated the death of the great souls as he was not an Indian. Therefore, the offence committed by the accused is against this great nation and heinous in nature," the Court remarked.

Bengaluru Court sentences a 21-year-old engineering student to 5-Year imprisonment for 'Celebrating' #PulwamaAttack.

He was found guilty of posting derogatory comments on FB supporting the acts of terrorists with the intention to disrupt the sovereignty and integrity of India. pic.twitter.com/0L6P9CTnXJ

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) November 1, 2022

Consequently, the accused Faiz Rasheed, pursuing Engineering at a Bengaluru-based college has been convicted under Section 153-A, 201 IPC and Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967

It may be noted that the court did not conduct trial for the offence punishable under section 124A of IPC as the same is kept in abeyance in view of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in S.G. Vombatkere Versus Union of India.

The case in brief

After the Pulwama Attack, several News Channels reported the incident by posting news pieces on Facebook on their own page/account. The accused wrote (as a reply to those posts) that "Ek musalman 40 par bhaari pad gaya Kashmir ka hero Allah Hu Akbar', 'ye tho mob lynching, ram mandir 2002, ka chota sa badla tha.. trailer samajna kyunki picture abhi bakhi hai chutiyo', 'how is the khauf Indian army??, "our boys are always funny" "how's the khauf Indian army?? gand Fati?"

He had also posted pictures of Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, and other BJP leaders with smiling emojis adding the words 'GALI GALI CHOR HAI''. He also posted a photo of the suicide attacker who was seen holding a rifle in his hand.

Pursuant to this, a suo motu case was filed and the police arrested him anc charged him under Section 153A ( offence of promoting disharmony, enmity or feelings of hatred between different communities ) 124A (sedition) of IPC, and also under UPA Act.

The Court's observations

During the trial of the case, the prosecution adduced cogent and convincing evidence before the court to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Further, the admissions made by the accused during the cross-examination strengthened the case of the prosecution.

The Court, having analyzed the prosecution's case against the engineering student Rasheed found that it was proved that he made the derogatory comments with an intention to promote enmity between different groups on the ground of religion and committed an act that is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different groups which was likely to disturb the public tranquillity

Further, the Court also noted that it was proved that the Hindu community people became angry and commented on the comments of the accused and also made derogatory comments and that some Muslim community people even supported the comments made by the accused and therefore, the acts of the accused clearly attract the ingredients of the offence punishable under section 153A of IPC.

"...the accused has taken the issue of Rama Mandir in his comments which instigates the religious feelings of Hindu community. He has also commented as one Muslim is equal to 40 persons and Muslim boys are always funny. Further there is evidence to show that the Hindu community people made derogatory comments by enraging the comments made by the accused...," the Court further noted in its order.

The Court also observed that the prosecution had proved that the accused deleted the posts made on his Facebook account with the intention to cause the disappearance of the evidence and screening himself from legal punishment and therefore, offence under Section 201 IPC was also made out.

Regarding the offence under Section 13 of the UAPA [Punishment for unlawful activities], the Court noted that the comments posted by the accused showed that he supported or advocated the terrorist act committed by the terrorists against the Indian Army with an intention to disrupt the sovereignty and integrity of India and with an intention to cause disaffection against India.

Therefore, the Court held that the prosecution was successful in adducing evidence to prove the ingredients of unlawful activity as defined under section 2(o) of the UA (P) Act and the offence punishable under section 13 of the UA(P) Act. 

Further, before parting with the order, the Court stressed that February 14, 2019, the day on which the Pulwama Attack took place, is a Black Day in the history of India as more than 40 Jawans sacrificed their lives for the nation.

"Due to the said incident, the whole nation was immersed in an ocean of sorrow. In this situation, the accused celebrated the death of more than 40 Indian Jawanswho sacrificed their lives to protect the lives of the citizens of this country and to protect this great nation which has given every citizen of this county including the accused the fundamental rights such as right to equality, freedom of speech and expression, right to life and personal liberty, right against exploitation, right to freedom of religion, cultural and educational rights and constitutional remedies in case of any violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under part-III of the constitution," the Court concluded by adding thus.