BENGALURU: In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court held that chanting the slogan ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ promotes harmony and does not incite hatred or discord. The judgment came as the court quashed a case filed against five Hindu activists from Mangalore, including a man named Suresh, who was accused of spreading religious hatred by protesting in front of a mosque and shouting the slogan.
The case dates back to June 9, when the petitioner, along with several others, was returning home after watching Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s swearing-in ceremony. The petitioner and his associates, feeling a surge of patriotism, began chanting ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ as they made their way through the streets of Mangalore. At one point, a group of around 25 people stopped them, questioning why they were chanting the slogan near a mosque.
The situation escalated, and during the altercation, one of the petitioners was stabbed. The petitioner subsequently filed a complaint about the attack. However, the following day, a Muslim man, P.K. Abdullah, filed a counter-complaint at Konaje Police Station in Mangalore, alleging that the petitioner and his group had gathered in front of the mosque, chanted provocative slogans, and threatened the local Muslim community.
In response to Abdullah’s complaint, the police registered a case against the activists under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony.
The activists, led by Suresh, challenged the FIR in the High Court, arguing that they had merely chanted a patriotic slogan and had no intention of inciting religious enmity or hatred. The court, presided over by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, ruled in favor of the petitioners, stating that the charge under Section 153A was not applicable in this case.
The court noted that for Section 153A to be invoked, there must be a clear incident that provokes hatred between different groups based on factors such as religion or language. In this particular case, the court found no evidence of such an event occurring. Justice Nagaprasanna remarked that the slogan ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ is one that promotes national unity and harmony, and there was no indication that it had been used to create division or incite hatred in this instance.
The court’s ruling emphasized that this case is a prime example of the misuse of Section 153A of the IPC. The court pointed out that the law is intended to address serious offenses involving the promotion of enmity between different communities, and should not be invoked frivolously.
“There is not a single element in this case that justifies the application of IPC Section 153A,” Justice Nagaprasanna stated in his judgment. He further clarified that the mere chanting of ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ does not constitute an act of hatred, as the slogan is one of national pride and unity. The court added that the complaint itself did not contain any allegations that would suggest that the slogan had been used to spread discord.
In his argument, the petitioners’ advocate, Senior Counsel M. Arun Shyam, emphasized that his clients were only expressing their patriotic sentiments after witnessing the swearing-in ceremony of the Prime Minister. He contended that there was no intent to provoke or threaten anyone, and that the complaint filed against them was a misrepresentation of the events that took place.
The court agreed with this argument, noting that chanting ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ is a common patriotic expression that has long been associated with national pride. It further stated that the slogan does not target any particular religious group and does not carry any connotations of hatred or enmity.
The judgment highlighted the importance of distinguishing between acts of patriotism and acts of provocation, stating that not every slogan or chant should be interpreted as an attempt to incite religious or communal tensions. The court ruled that the activists were merely exercising their right to free expression and had not committed any offense under Section 153A of the IPC.
The High Court’s ruling is likely to have broader implications for cases involving charges of promoting religious enmity. By quashing the case against the activists, the court has sent a clear message that patriotic expressions like ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ should not be mischaracterized as acts of provocation or hatred. The ruling underscores the importance of ensuring that Section 153A is applied judiciously and not misused to stifle legitimate expressions of patriotism or free speech.
The case also highlights the delicate balance between freedom of expression and maintaining communal harmony in a diverse society like India. While the court has reaffirmed the right of individuals to express their love for their country through slogans like ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’, it also serves as a reminder that such expressions should not be used in a manner that could be perceived as threatening or provocative to others.
As the court pointed out, slogans of national pride should be seen as fostering unity rather than division, and in this case, the allegations of promoting religious enmity were found to be baseless. The judgment sets an important precedent for future cases involving similar charges and reinforces the idea that patriotism, when expressed responsibly, should be celebrated rather than criminalised.
