Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, ANISH KUMAR GUPTA
Priyanka Bharti – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. quashing of fir for alleged insult to religion. (Para 2 , 3 , 6) |
| 2. argument against the sufficiency of fir. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. definition and interpretation of malicious intent. (Para 8 , 10 , 13) |
| 4. cognizable offence due to tearing pages of holy text. (Para 9 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. importance of context in hate speech adjudication. (Para 14 , 15 , 19) |
| 6. dismissal of writ petition. (Para 23) |
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 submitt
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....
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....
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.
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....
Section 295-A IPC requires proof of deliberate and malicious intent to outrage religious feelings, which was not established in this case.
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
