The Supreme Court on December 17 raised significant questions on how raising the slogan “Jai Shri Ram” could constitute a criminal offence. The observation came during a hearing on a petition challenging the Karnataka High Court’s decision to quash criminal proceedings against two individuals accused of shouting a religious slogan inside a mosque.
A bench comprising Justices Pankaj Mithal and Sandeep Mehta questioned the very basis of the case, asking: “They were shouting a religious phrase or name. How does that amount to an offence?”
Background of the Case
The controversy stems from an incident where two individuals allegedly entered a mosque in Karnataka and shouted “Jai Shri Ram.” The complainant, Haydhar Ali C M, had filed the case, leading to charges under Section 295A (deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings), Section 503 (criminal intimidation), and Section 447 (criminal trespass) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Karnataka High Court, in its September 13 ruling, quashed the criminal proceedings, stating that the allegations failed to meet the criteria for the offences mentioned. The High Court had remarked that it was “not understandable” how the slogan would outrage religious feelings, particularly when the complainant himself acknowledged that Hindus and Muslims were living in harmony in the area.
Supreme Court’s Key Observations
During the hearing, the Supreme Court bench addressed the petitioner’s counsel, Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat, with pointed questions.
Justice Mithal and Justice Mehta noted that shouting a religious slogan did not inherently amount to a criminal act, asking, “They were shouting a religious phrase or name. How does that constitute an offence?”
The bench also sought clarity on how the accused individuals were identified. Referring to the evidence, the court asked, “How do you identify these respondents? You claim they were captured on CCTV. Who identified these individuals?”
In response, Advocate Devadatt Kamat argued that the Karnataka High Court had quashed the case prematurely, as the investigation was incomplete at the time of the judgment.
High Court’s Reasoning
The Karnataka High Court’s ruling emphasised that the incident did not satisfy the conditions required to invoke Section 295A, which pertains to acts done with deliberate and malicious intent to outrage religious feelings. The Court observed:
The slogan “Jai Shri Ram” by itself could not be construed as an act outraging religious sentiments. The complainant’s admission of communal harmony in the area further weakened the argument of religious disharmony.
As the allegations lacked substantive ingredients of the offences, continuing the proceedings would amount to “an abuse of the process of law.”
Supreme Court’s Inquiry into the Quashing
The Supreme Court bench questioned whether the High Court’s quashing of the case was justified based on the absence of clear evidence and incomplete investigation. However, it also acknowledged the High Court’s reasoning that the allegations did not amount to offences under Sections 503 (criminal intimidation) and 447 (criminal trespass).
The case highlights a legal and societal debate around the criminalisation of religious slogans and the interpretation of religious harmony under Indian law. While the petitioner argues that shouting a slogan in a religious place amounts to deliberate provocation, the courts have thus far viewed the act as insufficient to constitute a criminal offence.
The Supreme Court has not yet issued its final ruling but has sought further clarifications on the identification of the accused and the investigation status.
Comments