SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(HP) 158

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
BHAWANI SINGH
ACHARYA RAJNEESH OF BOMBAY - Appellant
Versus
NAVAL THAKUR - Respondent
Cr. M.P. (M) No. 1 of 1987
Decided On : 10/23/1989

Advocates Appeared:
K.L. Arora, Sr. Advocate with Harish Gulati and B.K. Malhotra, for Petitioner; M.L. Sharma and Dharamveer Sharma, (for No. 1) and L.S. Panta, Dy. Advocate General, (for Nos. 2 and 3) for Respondents.

Prior sanction of the Government is a mandatory requirement for initiating proceedings under Section 295-A of the Penal Code and failure to obtain such sanction means that the court has no jurisdiction to entertain and continue with such proceedings.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTION 482 - QUASHING OF PROCEEDINGS - OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 295-A AND 298 OF THE PENAL CODE - PRIOR SANCTION OF THE GOVERNMENT - REQUIREMENT OF - JURISDICTION OF THE COURT TO QUASH PROCEEDINGS - PRINCIPLES GOVERNING.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, Acharya Rajneesh, challenged the issuance of notice by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, under Sections 295-A and 298 of the Penal Code in a complaint moved by the complainant, Naval Thakur, under Sections 292, 293, and 295-A of the Penal Code. The complainant alleged that the petitioner had made slanderous attacks on the saints and seers of India in his book "From Sex to Super Consciousness" and that he had distributed a poster advocating free sex and carefree life.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the complaint was not maintainable and that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain and proceed with the same in the absence of prior sanction from the Government, as required under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court also held that the allegations did not constitute any offence under Sections 295-A and 298 of the Penal Code and that the continuance of the prosecution amounted to gross abuse of the process of the court.

Issues: 1. Whether the complaint was maintainable in the absence of prior sanction from the Government under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure? 2. Whether the allegations constituted any offence under Sections 295-A and 298 of the Penal Code?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires prior sanction of the Government to institute proceedings under Section 295-A of the Penal Code. This is a mandatory requirement and failure to obtain such sanction means that the court has no jurisdiction to entertain and continue with such proceedings. 2. The ingredients of the offence under Section 295-A of the Penal Code are that the intention of the accused in outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India should be deliberate and malicious. Simple and innocent expression of opinion will not bring the act within the parameters of this provision. 3. The offence under Section 298 of the Penal Code requires that the accused utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any gesture in the sight of that person or places any object in the sight of that person intentionally and deliberately to wound the religious feelings of that person. This Section does not speak anything about the writings in the form of Annexures-P-1 and P-2 and the alleged interview to the Weekly Dharamayuga.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings pending in the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, in private complaint No. 2-1/86, instituted on 2-1-1986.

ORDER

By this petition under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Acharya Rajneesh of Bombay, challenges the issuance of notice dated 4-2-1986 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, under Ss.295-A and 298 of the Penal Code in a complaint moved by complainant Naval Thakur under Ss.292, 293, 295-A of the Penal Code.

2. The essential facts, giving rise to this petition, are that the complainant, a resident of village Badah in Tehsil Kullu, moved a complaint against the petitioner alleging that he has been closely associated with certain Yogic Asthanas and Yoga Ashram under the guidance of Acharya Prakash Dev. Further, he stated that he has been associated with the Mahabudhi Society of India, New Delhi, and has been engaged in meditating and practically practising the Yogic Ashnas preached by the saints and seers of India. He was greatly influenced by the teachings of Swami Vivekananda and others to the world.

3. The further allegation is that the complainant visited Span Motel on 11-12-1985 at the residence of the petitioner on his birthday and the complainant, after having been shown by the police, sat there to watch him. The complainant sought an interview with the petitioner through his Private Secretary to find out the truth of the teachings of the petitioner but he was not given any appointment, although the Secretary of the petitioner had promised him to do so. It is also stated that a poster was distributed which advocated free sex and carefree life and enjoyment in the present world. Besides, the petitioner has published a book entitled "From Sex to Super Consciousness" in which he has strenuously stressed for sex to Samadhi and from Lust to Lord and from Kama to Rama. The petitioner, according to the complainant, has made slanderous attacks on the saints and seers of India. This book, he says, goes against the teachings and preachings of the Hindu scriptures, thus injuring the feelings of the complainant seriously. This book, he further says, is an obscene book and is available in the Government District Library at Kullu, which should have been banned and forfeited to the State Government since it not only injures the feelings of the people of Himachal Pradesh but also of the humanity at large. The complainant further alleges that the whole of Himachal Pradesh has been the abode of Rishis and Munnis and gods and goddesses but the petitioner, surrounded by moneyed people, will not only defile the poor Himachalis and lead them astray but also affect their plain and pure vision about the blessings of Lord Ramakrishna Paramhansa, who kindled the flames of spirituality throughout the world and by these teachings, the accused-petitioner will tarnish the whole image of spirituality and bring ruination to peace, serenity and calmness of the people in the area for all times to come. The complainant has placed, during his preliminary examination, pamphlet (Ex. P. 1) and book "From Sex to Super Consciousness" and a copy of the Weekly with interview of the petitioner, Dharamayuga (Ex. P. 2), which hit his religious sentiments. On the basis of the complaint and these documents, the trying Judge has issued notice to the petitioner on 4-2-1986 for offences under Ss.295-A and 298 of the Penal Code.

4. The petitioner has admitted his presence in Himachal Pradesh at Manali for 3 to 4 weeks for health reasons but has denied having given any speech or published or circulated any book or pamphlet at Kullu or Manali during this time. He asserts that during his life, he has his own views and beliefs. After passing through various phases in life, he is devoted to spiritual work, touring extensively, organising meditation camps, giving lectures, writing books of spiritual matters, meeting his followers-mostly intellectuals. His devotees have been picking up what they understood from his speeches and lectured, and tape recording the same and preparing audio cassettes freel











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top