Religious Feelings & Religious Sentiments Cannot Be So Fragile To Be Hurt Or Provoked By Individual’s Speech: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has observed that India is a country that is unique due to various religions, faiths and languages and that its unity lies in this coexistence. The Court added that religious feelings and religious sentiments cannot be so fragile as to be hurt or provoked by a speech of an individual.
“I am of the view that India is a country which is unique due to various religions, faiths and languages which co exist with side by side. Its unity lies in this coexistence. Religious feelings and religious sentiments cannot be so fragile as to be hurt or provoked by a speech of an individual.”, Justice Jasmeet Singh observed.
The Court further noted that faith and religion are more resilient and cannot be hurt or provoked by views/instigation by an individual.
“Religion and faith are not as fragile as human beings. They have survived for centuries and will survive for many more. Faith and religion are more resilient and cannot be hurt or provoked by views of / instigation by,an individual.”, the Court said.
The Court made these observations while quashing the summons order issued to Maharashtra Navnirman Sena Chief Raj Thackeray in an alleged hate speech case.
As per the complaint it was stated that the petitioner- Raj Thackeray had made some comments with regard to a particular festival. It was stated in the complaint that because of the comments made by the petitioner, the religious sentiments of the complainant and the people of the respective state had been hurt.
Senior Advocate Arunabh Chowdhary appeared for the petitioner whereas ASC Rupali Bandhopadhya appeared for the State.
The Court observed that “…since prior sanction is required of the Centre or a State Government for initiating proceedings under Section 124-A, 153-A/153 B/295A IPC and admittedly no such sanction has been taken, the summoning order,according to me is liable to be quashed.”
The Court rejected the petitioner’s plea for quashing of the criminal complaints.
“…the petition is partly allowed with regard to summoning order dated 04.12.2008 passed by learned Magistrate, Patna City in C.A. 946 of 2008 summoning the petitioners under Sections 124A/153A/153B/295A/506/114 IPC. Consequently, the issuance of bailable warrants vide order 03.01.2009 and NBWs vide order dated the order dated 26.07.2013 passed by the Ld. Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Special Acts) in Criminal Complaint No. 12/2A/13 (arising out of C.A. No. 946 of 2008) are also hereby quashed. The prayer for quashing of the criminal complaint is rejected.”, the Court held.
Cause Title- Swararaj @ Raj Shrikant Thakeray & Anr. v. State & Anr.