Back
SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Harjinder Singh @ Jinda – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Sandeep Moudgil, J.
This criminal revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners with a prayer for setting aside the order dated 29.11.2022 vide which the cancellation report filed by respondent No.2 has been accepted as well as the order dated 22.02.2024 whereby the SDJM, Nakodar has dismissed the complaint/protest petition which was filed by the petitioners against acceptance of the cancellation report.
2. Brief facts of the case are that a video went viral in which the accused Gurdas Maan who, while performing in one of the Programmes/Mela, stated that Laddi Shah is the descendant of Sri Guru Amar Dass. Such an act of accused, being actually and historically false, offended the religious sentiments of Sikh masses and a complaint for commission of offence punishable under Section 295-A IPC was filed by the petitioners. Thereafter, the instant FIR was lodged against the accused. However, cancellation report was filed in the FIR as a result of which the petitioner moved protest petition/complaint before SDJM, who vide impugned order dated 22.02.2024 has dismissed the same prompting the petitioners to approach this Court.
3. It is averred that it was the duty of
Section 295-A IPC requires proof of deliberate and malicious intent to outrage religious feelings, which was not established in this case.
The court held that deliberate intention is required to constitute an offense under Section 299 BNS, emphasizing that reckless acts, particularly by public figures, attract legal scrutiny in relation....
Outraging religious feelings – Journey from ‘Nar to Narayan’ is not only embedded in ethos of India but is also true to religions born outside India.
Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings, as per Section 299 BNS, necessitate intentional insult to religion, confirming the applicability of cognizable offences in public....
The court ruled that self-proclaiming as a religious figure, intending to outraging communal sentiments, justified continued investigation under Section 295A IPC.
To establish an offence under Section 295A of the IPC, there must be deliberate and malicious intent to outrage religious feelings, which was not evident in the petitioner's discourse.
The judgment established the importance of protecting artistic freedom and the need for sensitivity in matters of freedom of speech and expression.
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
