FIR quashed where allegations lack deliberate malicious intent to outrage religious feelings of a class of citizens, public nuisance elements, lascivious material, rendering only non-cognizable offence unsustainable.

JUDGMENT :

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 with the prayer to quash the FIR as well as the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Hiranpur P.S. Case No. 64 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 292 , 299 and 302 of B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner in her channel through the social media is abusing Lord Jesus in filthy language by which the religious sentiments of the informant has been hurt and the harmony between two religions i.e. the Christians and the followers of Sarna religion (Hindu Religion) is being disturbed.

4. On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, police registered Hiranpur P.S. Case No. 64 of 2025 for the offences as already indicated above and took up investigation of the case. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the investigation of the case is still going on and the charge sheet has not yet been submitted.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner by relying upon the Judgement of this Court in the case of Mukesh Kumar Shukla @ Mukesh @ Pinku Shukla vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr. reported in [2024 (3) East Cr C 108 (Jhr)] wherein, this Court relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mahendra Singh Dhoni vs. Yerraguntla Shyamsundar & Another reported in (2017) 7 SCC 760 wherein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India had the occasion to consider the scope and impact of Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code which corresponds to Section 299 of B.N.S. and it was observed that -A of the Indian Penal Code does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act which tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of a class of citizens is not be penalised. It penalises only those acts of insults to or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens. Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the purview of -A of the Indian Penal Code.

6. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in that case, this Court considered the Constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Ramji Lal Modi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in AIR 1957 SC 620 wherein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has clarified that the provisions of Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion, when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of a particular class of citizen. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penal consequences.

7. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there being no allegation against the petitioner that the petitioner with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of a class of citizens of India, has done anything not there is any allegation that t