IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
Sri Suresha, S/o Vishwanatha Poojary – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 5694 of 2024
Decided on : 20-09-2024
Quashing - Registration of Crime - IPC Sections 143, 147, 148, 153A, 504, 506, 149 - The court interpreted the provisions of IPC, particularly Section 153A, emphasizing that mere slogans cannot promote enmity or disharmony, leading to the quashing of the FIR as a counterblast to the petitioners' complaint.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were attacked after celebrating a political event and shouting slogans. They filed a complaint, but a counter-complaint was registered against them alleging threats, leading to the registration of a second FIR.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the second FIR was a counterblast to the petitioners' complaint and did not meet the necessary ingredients of Section 153A IPC, which requires promotion of enmity between groups.
Issues: Whether the allegations in the second FIR constituted an offence under Section 153A IPC and if the FIR should be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the allegations did not establish the necessary elements of Section 153A IPC, as the petitioners' actions did not promote disharmony or enmity between groups.
Result: The FIR registered in Crime No.81 of 2024 against the petitioners is quashed.
ORDER :
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question registration of a crime in Crime No.81 of 2024 of Konaje Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 153A, 504, 506 and 149 of the IPC.
2. Heard Sri M. Aruna Shyam, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri B.N. Jagadeesh, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1.
3. The facts, in brief, adumbrated are as follows:-
On 09-06-2024 between 8.45 p.m. and 9.15 p.m. one Harish, Nanda Kumar, Subhash and Kishan Kumar were returning back after finishing the celebrations of victory and taking of oath by the Prime Minister. When they reached Samadan Bar of Boliyar Grama, Ullal Taluk, it is the case of the petitioners, that they were attacked by 25 persons alleging how they raised slogans of Bharath Matha Ki Jai and one of them is said to have stabbed into stomach of Harish and back of Nanda Kumar. Based on the said incident, on the very night Kishan Kumar lodged a complaint at 11.00 p.m. against 23 persons. This becomes a crime in Crime No.80 of 2024 for offences punishable under Sections 341, 143, 147, 148, 504, 506, 323, 324, 307 and 149 of the IPC. It is after registration of the crime, the next day a complaint comes to be registered not by the accused but by one P.K. Abdulla alleging that the petitioners came near Mohiuddin Jumma Masjid in Boliyar and threatened him and others with dire consequences and asked them to leave the country. On the said allegation, the Police register a crime in Crime No.81 of 2024 for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 153A, 504, 506 and 149 of the IPC. After registration of the crime, the petitioners are before this Court calling in question the said registration of crime.
4. The learned senior counsel Sri M.Aruna Shyam appearing for the petitioners would vehemently contend that the petitioners were shouting slogans of Bharath Matha Ki Jai and also taking the name of the Prime Minister after the oath taking ceremony of the Prime Minister was over. This was not tolerated by several persons who launched an attack upon these petitioners and stabbed them even for the reason that the petitioners were shouting slogans of Bharath Matha Ki Jai. This immediately becomes a crime, but as a counterblast the next day some person, who was not even involved in the incident, lodges a complaint alleging that the petitioners have threatened them to leave the country and go. He would submit that, if investigation in such cases is permitted, it would be permitting investigation into shouting of slogan of Bharath Matha Ki Jai, which the learned senior counsel submits, is by no stretch of imagination can generate communal hatred.
5. Per contra, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor Sri B.N. Jagadeesh would vehemently refute the submissions to contend that this is a classic case where Section 153A of the IPC would get completely attracted. No doubt, the petitioners were assaulted, but that is a separate crime which is being investigated into. However, the act of these petitioners in threatening the complainant or others would clearly attract Section 153A of the IPC for the allegations that are made. He would, therefore, contend that it is a matter of investigation in the least. He seeks dismissal of the petition.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record.
7. The afore-narrated facts lie in a narrow compass. On the evening of 09-06-2024, after the Prime Minister takes oath between 9.15 p.m. and 10.35 p.m. the petitioners were celebrating the victory and oath taking ceremony and were raising slogans in praise of Hon’ble Prime Minister Sri Narendra Modi and also raising louder slogans of Bharath Matha Ki Jai. It appears that at that point in time about 25 persons attacked the petitioners for the reason that they were raising slogans of ‘Bharath Matha Ki Jai’ and they were even
The court established that mere expressions of political support do not constitute an offence under Section 153A IPC unless they promote enmity between distinct groups.
The FIR lacks necessary ingredients for offences under Section 196(1)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, justifying its quashing due to vagueness.
The court emphasized the need to protect freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) and determined the FIR lacked basis for criminal charges under Sections 353(2) and 505(2).
Every citizen has right to offer criticism for every decision of State – He has right to say he is unhappy with any decision of State – Every citizen of India has a right to be critical of action of ....
The court ruled that mere dissent or criticism of government actions does not constitute an offence under Section 153A IPC unless it promotes enmity or hatred.
Point of law: The extreme that the High Court thought that in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, it could quash a First Information Report. The police had not even com....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.