JUDGMENT.-This appeal is against the acquittal of the respondent by the Third Presidency Magistrate, Saidapet, Madras, of an offence under section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code.

The respondent was the printer and publisher of the Tamil Weekly ‘Nathikam‘. He published three articles in Nathikam on 16th December, 1960, 6th January, 1961 and 12th January, 1961 under the caption ‘Allavin Thandanaiyil Alangolam.‘The case for the prosecution is that these articles were published with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feeling of the Muslims. The purport of the two articles which are relied on by the prosecution is given below.

The first article, which appeared in the issue of 16th December, 1960, dealt with the punishment of stoning to death prescribed in Koran to persons found guilty of adultery. The writer criticised the punishment prescribed for the offence and commented that there was inconsistency in the Koran which had made provision for divorce and re-marriage and at the same time prescribed such cruel punishment for adultery. The author of the article also pointed out, that, though having relationship with more women than one would be strictly adultery, the Muslims do not punish a person when he goes through the ceremony of nikka and married four women. The writer in pointing out that the law as enunciated in Koran is not just has also made reference to Allah the God. After observing that, if a married man had relationship with a woman he liked other than his wife, the proper thing would be to allow a divorce and permit the person to marry the woman he liked, he proceeded to put a question as follows: —

Why did not Allah know this proper course and justice ? Is that Allah a fool, or is he an unjust person incapable of behaving in a just manner? ............Is Allah, who preached that persons who committed adultery should be stoned to death different from the Allah, who preached divorce and remarriage ? If not, why should a barbarous punishment be prescribed on the one side and divorce and re-marriage prescribed on the other ? Is it because Allah is not able to understand the difference between these two ? If Allah is in the position of not understanding this difference, how can we accept that Allah is all knowing ? ..............Without following the proper course why should Allah foolishly say that they should be stoned to death? When all these are taken into consideration it is. clear that Allah is an absolute fool who is unable to understand what is meant by adultery. How can persons with intelligence accept Allah who has not got the capacity to understand the crime as. a creator of laws punishing all sins ?“

The second article, dated 6th January, 1961 relates to punishment prescribed in Koran for theft. In Koran the punishment prescribed for theft is cutting off both the hands. After giving an extract from paragraph 38, chapter 5 of Koran the author commented that this punishment was prescribed by no less a person than the all-powerful and wise Allah, and the Koran also says the same. Dealing with the all-powerful Allah the author remarked,

”If Allah came from Heaven and prescribed his law, even Muslim countries like Afghanistan and Turkey would not follow him. On the other hand they would bury him. The law prescribed by him is prevalent only in Kabarsthan and if Allah is God he will be sent to that place only. A foolish and barbarous person like Allah has no place in this world. If Allah is powerful, let him go to that place and show this power................................“

Dealing with the wisdom of Allah, the author remarked:

The law enunciated by Allah 1200 years ago was given up by Romans, Greeks and Tamils as not suitable........How can Allah who prescribed such a barbarous punishment 200 years after the civilised people gave it up, be called a wise man.”

The article concluded by observing

“Allah who when looked at from any point of view, is not powerful or wise, calls himself as an all-power

Click Here to Read the rest of this document