Back
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Narasimham, J.
NARAYAN DAS - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
Criminal Revn. 145 Of 1951
Decided On : NOVEMBER 19, 1951
SECTION 298, IPC - OFFENCE OF WOUNDING RELIGIOUS FEELINGS - DELIBERATE INTENTION - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION - DISTINCTION BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE AND INTENTION - DOMINANT INTENTION - WORDS SPOKEN WITH THE INTENTION TO EMPHASIZE OWN DIVINITY NOT AMOUNTING TO DELIBERATE INTENTION TO WOUND RELIGIOUS FEELINGS - WORDS SPOKEN WITH THE INTENTION TO OUTRAGE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS AMOUNTING TO DELIBERATE INTENTION.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner No. 1, Narayan Das alias Madhusudan Das Babaji, proclaimed himself to be the living God 'Anantakishore' and gathered disciples who believed in his divinity. He married a girl named Bhanumati, who was also believed to be 'Anantakishori'. On Ratha Jatra day, the Babaji and his wife were placed on a Rath and dragged through the village. The Babaji dissuaded villagers from going to Bonaigarh to see the Rath Jatra of Lord Jagannath, saying that Jagannath was a piece of wood and that he was the living God. Petitioner No. 2, Dhaneswar Mahato, a fanatical disciple of the Babaji, said that he could pass urine on the village Goddess 'Gramadevi' and Baneswar, as they were mere stone idols.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Babaji's words were not said with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of others, as his primary intention was to emphasize his own divinity and not to insult Lord Jagannath. However, the court held that Dhaneswar Mahato's words were said with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of the villagers, as his primary intention was to outrage their feelings and to administer such a rude shock that they would fall in line with him and join in the worship of the Baba.
Issues: 1. Whether the Babaji's words were said with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of others? 2. Whether Dhaneswar Mahato's words were said with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of the villagers?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Babaji's words were not said with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of others, as his primary intention was to emphasize his own divinity and not to insult Lord Jagannath. The court relied on the fact that the Babaji had already induced a belief in the minds of several villagers that he was living God and that his object in saying that Lord Jagannath at Bonaigarh was merely a piece of wood was to contrast his position as living God with that of the inanimate object at Bonaigarh in furtherance of his preaching against idol worship. 2. The court held that Dhaneswar Mahato's words were said with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of the villagers, as his primary intention was to outrage their feelings and to administer such a rude shock that they would fall in line with him and join in the worship of the Baba. The court relied on the fact that Dhaneswar knew that the village deity and Baneswar Mahadeb were held in great reverence by some of his covillagers and that his remarks were made with premeditation with the primary object of reenforcing the argument of the Babaji by using such an insulting expression while referring to the idols held sacred by the villagers.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the Babaji of the offence under Section 298, IPC, and set aside his conviction and sentence. The court convicted Dhaneswar Mahato of the offence under Section 298, IPC, and upheld his sentence.
NARASIMHAM, J.
( 1 ) THIS revision has been referred to me under Section 429, Cr. p. C. in consequence of a difference of opinion between my Lord the Chief Justice and my learned brother Justice Das (as he then was) who first heard the revision as a Division Bench.
( 2 ) PETITIONER No. 1 Narayan Das alias Madhusudan Das Babaji came to village saradhapur in Bonai State, proclaimed himself to be the living God 'anantakishore', called upon the villagers to worship him and succeeded in gathering a number of disciples around him who believe in his divinity. There was a girl named Bhanumati aged about fifteen years (P. W. 7.) daughter of one Rajib Lochan Mohanti of the village, The Babaji somehow induced a belief in the girl as well as in her father and some of the co-villagers that she was 'anantakishori' and that none else but he was fit to wed her. In consequence of this belief the girl was in due course given in marriage to him by her father and for sometime the Babaji and his wife were looked upon as living God and goddess. On the 17th of July 1950 which was the Ratha Jatra day some of the disciples of the Babaji placed him and his wife on a Bath and dragged it through the village. Some of the other villagers however on that day wanted to go to bonaigarh to see the Rath Jatra of Lord Jagannath that was being celebrated there. The Babaji was said to have dissuaded them from going to Bonaigarh by saying that Jagannath was after all a piece of wood where as he (Babaji) was living God 'nararupi Narayan' and that he should be worshipped. Petitioner No. 2 dhaneswar Mahato who is said to be fantical disciple of the Babaji tried to reenforce the argument of the Babaji by saying that the village Goddess 'gramadevi" and the deity known as Baneswar were mere stone idols and that dhaneswar could pass urine on them.
( 3 ) ON these allegations the Babaji was prosecuted for three offences; firstly, for the offence of cheating under Section 417,. P. C. ; secondly, for the offence under Section 153,. P. C. for organising Rath Jatra without a license and thirdly, for the offence under Section 298,. P. C. for having deliberately wounded the religious feelings of the villagers by saying that Lord Jagannath was only a piece of wood. Petitioner Dhaneswar Mahanto was charged under section 293,. P. C. for having deliberately wounded the religious feelings of the people by saying that he could pass urine on the village Goddess 'gramadevti' and Baneswar as they were stone idols. The Sub-divisional magistrate of Bonai convicted the Babaji of all the three charges and sentenced him to six months rigorous imprisonment under each count. He convicted petitioner Dhaneswar under Section 298,. P. C. and sentenced him to three months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/ -. On appeal, the learned sessions Judge set aside the conviction under Section 153,. P. C. of petitioner narayan Das but maintained the conviction and sentence passed on both the petitioners in respect of the other offences.
( 4 ) WHEN the revision petition was first heard by the Division Bench both the hon'ble Judges agreed that the conviction under Section 417,. P. C. could not stand. My learned brother Justice Das (as he then was) held that there was no evidence to show that any deception was practised by the Babaji and that the materials on record were consistent with the view that the Babaji honestly believed himself to be God incarnate. I would, with respect, agree with him and hold that the charge under Section 417,. P. C. cannot stand in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the evidence to prove deception.
( 5 ) AS regards the offence under Section 293.. P. C. , both the Hon'ble Judges agreed that the statements attributed to the two petitioners were, in fact, made by them on the date in question, They, however, differed on the question as to to whether the statements were made with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of the villagers.
( 6 ) SECTION 2
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
