The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed criminal charges against two men accused of offending religious sentiments by chanting “Jai Shri Ram” inside a mosque. Justice M Nagaprasanna ruled that this act did not disrupt public order or offend any religious group, pointing that the incident did not “outrage the religious feelings of any class.”
The case involved Keerthan Kumar and Sachin Kumar, residents of Dakshina Kannada, who faced charges under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 295A, 447, and 506. The charges were based on a police complaint alleging that the two entered a mosque at night in September last year and shouted “Jai Shri Ram.”
Section 295A of the IPC criminalizes intentional actions aimed at insulting religious beliefs to incite outrage. The Court, however, found no evidence that the slogans constituted an attempt to incite hostility or disrupt harmony.
“Given that Hindus and Muslims co-exist peacefully in the area, this incident cannot reasonably be interpreted as an affront to any religious group,” the Court noted.
The defendants’ counsel argued that the mosque, being a public place, nullified any claim of trespassing. Moreover, chanting “Jai Shri Ram” did not fulfill the conditions of an offense under Section 295A. The State government, however, opposed the quashing and sought further investigation.
In its decision, the Court referenced a Supreme Court ruling, specifying that not all actions fall under Section 295A, especially if they do not threaten public order. “Allowing continued proceedings would be an abuse of legal process and a miscarriage of justice,” the Court concluded.
In a similar vein, Justice M Nagaprasanna granted a stay on the FIR against Amit Malviya, head of BJP’s IT cell, for his alleged remarks about Rahul Gandhi, ruling that there was insufficient evidence that Malviya’s statements posed a threat to public order.
Additionally, Justice Nagaprasanna stayed the investigation into YouTuber Ajeet Bharti, who faced accusations of making inflammatory comments about Rahul Gandhi and the Ram Temple. Malviya had alleged that Gandhi intended to replace the Ram Temple in Ayodhya with a new Babri mosque.
In another related ruling in September, Justice Nagaprasanna noted that the slogan “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” could not be classified as hate speech.
These recent rulings by Justice M Nagaprasanna exhibit a troubling leniency towards actions that provoke and insult religious minorities, reflecting a disturbing alignment with a majoritarian ideology that threatens to undermine India’s secular fabric.
