Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Vivek Kumar Birla, Anish Kumar Gupta,JJ.
Priyanka Bharti – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Syed Abid Ali Naqvi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Amit Sinha, learned AGA-I for the State-Respondents.
2. Present petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned FIR dated 29.12.2024, registered as Case Crime No.518 of 2024, under Section 299 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS”) Police Station Roravar, District Aligarh and further not to arrest the petitioner pursuant to said FIR.
3. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no offence under section 299 BNS has been committed. It is submitted that the petitioner is a highly qualified and a brilliant student of Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi and has been registered in the Ph.D. Programme during the academic year 2024-25. It is further submitted that the petitioner is politically active lady, who is the active member of Rastriya Janta Dal (RJD) Party and she was appointed as spokesperson of the Rashtriya Janta Dal (RJD) Party alongwith three others spokespersons and the alleged incident had taken place when she was participating in the debate organized by the news channel "India TV" and "TV9 Bharatvarsh" as the spokesperson of the Rastriya
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 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....
To establish an offence under Section 295-A IPC, there must be deliberate and malicious intent to outrage religious feelings; mere careless or unwitting acts do not suffice.
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.
Section 295-A IPC requires proof of deliberate and malicious intent to outrage religious feelings, which was not established in this case.
FIR quashed - Through Facebook ID, posted objectionable material - Religious sentiments - Petitioner has shared post of other person, even, contents of FIR does not, prima facie, establish alleged of....
The judgment established the importance of protecting artistic freedom and the need for sensitivity in matters of freedom of speech and expression.
The court emphasized the need to protect freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) and determined the FIR lacked basis for criminal charges under Sections 353(2) and 505(2).
The judgment emphasizes the duty of every citizen to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all people, and the penalization of acts insulting religious beliefs under Section 29....
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
