News Arena

Join us

Home
/

k-taka-hc-shouting-jai-shri-ram-in-mosque-not-offensive

States

K'taka HC: Shouting 'Jai Shri Ram' in mosque not offensive

In September last year, few entered the mosque at night and shouted the slogan, leading to police charges under sections of the IPC, including Section 295A (deliberate insult to religion), 447 (trespass), and 506 (criminal intimidation).

News Arena Network - Bengaluru - UPDATED: October 15, 2024, 10:55 PM - 2 min read

Karnataka HC: Shouting 'Jai Shri Ram' in mosque not offensive

K'taka HC: Shouting 'Jai Shri Ram' in mosque not offensive

The Karnataka High Court highlighted Section 295A which requires evidence of deliberate acts intended to insult religion.


The Karnataka High Court has quashed criminal charges against two men accused of raising "Jai Shri Ram" slogans inside a mosque in Dakshina Kannada. The court found no evidence of intent to insult religious feelings or create disharmony.

 

In September last year, men entered the mosque at night and shouted the slogan, leading to police charges under sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Section 295A (deliberate insult to religion), 447 (trespass), and 506 (criminal intimidation).

 

The accused petitioned the High Court to dismiss these charges. Their lawyer argued that a mosque, being a public place, did not constitute a space for criminal trespass under the law. He also stated that chanting "Jai Shri Ram" did not meet the criteria for an offence under Section 295A.

 

The High Court agreed, saying Section 295A requires evidence of deliberate acts intended to insult religion. It highlighted that no malicious intent could be proven, especially since the area was known for harmony between Hindus and Muslims. The court concluded that the incident could not be interpreted as creating discord or disrupting public order.

 

The Karnataka government opposed the petition, arguing that the men should remain in custody for further investigation. However, the High Court disagreed, stating that not every act falls under the purview of Section 295A, especially if it doesn’t affect public peace. It noted that since no public disorder resulted from the incident, the charges could not be justified.

 

The court referenced the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Section 295A, which requires actions that lead to public disturbance or disorder to qualify as offences. It found that further proceedings against the men would misuse the legal process and lead to an injustice.

 

The court's ruling emphasised the importance of differentiating between actions that genuinely threaten religious harmony and those that do not meet the threshold for criminal liability under the IPC.

TOP CATEGORIES

  • Paris Olympics

QUICK LINKS

About us Rss FeedSitemapPrivacy PolicyTerms & Condition
logo

2024 News Arena India Pvt Ltd | All rights reserved | The Ideaz Factory