Back
VINOD DIWAKAR
Gulamuddin – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vinod Diwakar, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused material on record.
2. The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding arising out of charge-sheet dated 04.10.2023 and cognizance order dated 14.05.2024, passed in Criminal Case No. 749 of 2024, titled as State v. Mohd. Irshad Ansari and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 0344 of 2023, under Section 2 of Prevention of Insults of National Honour Act, 1971, registered at P.S. Jalaun, District Jalaun.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that; (i) the entire criminal proceedings lodged by the informant is only colourable exercise against the applicants; (ii) investigation do not suggest whether the flag mentioned in the FIR is a Tiranga or any other flag, having three colours; (iii) police have not brought any evidence on record to suggest that there was any mischief caused to the national flag as specified in Section 2 and 3 of Prevention of Insults of National Honour Act, 1971; (iv) the statement of Eshanullah and Ramdas has been extracted by police under the coercion and duress; (v) the statement
The court held that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be used to quash proceedings based on factual disputes, which must be resolved by the trial court.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of actus reus and mens rea for an offence under Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971.
Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view t....
The court determined that a lack of prima facie evidence for intent to insult the National Flag or promote disharmony justified granting bail subject to conditions for cooperating with the investigat....
The failure to lower the National Flag after sunset does not violate Section 2 of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act if there is no intent to dishonour the flag.
Mere inaction in not lowering the National Flag does not constitute an offense under the Act without mens rea.
The intention behind an act is essential in determining whether it constitutes an insult under the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971.
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
