Artistic expression must balance with respect for societal harmony; derogatory acts under the guise of free speech are actionable.

ORDER

1. This is applicant's first application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 ) for grant of anticipatory bail, as he/she is apprehending his/her arrest in connection with Crime No.563/2025 registered at Police Station Lasudiya, District Indore (MP) for offence punishable under Section 196, 299, 302, 352, 353(3) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67-A of the I.T. Act, 2000 .

2.Allegation against the applicant is that he has drawn a caricature, purportedly against the Rashtriya Swayam Sewak (RSS) and the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, showing them in an undignified manner, offending the complainant's religious fervour and temperament and also Signature Not Verified hurting his religious sentiments.

3. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he had only drawn the caricature in his satirical work, which was published on the applicant's Facebook page, and it was open for all to access. It is submitted that certain comments have also been made on the said caricature, which are not of the applicant and the applicant cannot be held responsible for the same.

4. In support of his submission, counsel for the applicant has also submitted that the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 has not been followed, and has also relied upon the decision rendered by the Kerala High Court in the case of Mammen Varghese and others vs. State of Kerala and another 2024/KER/57138 , and in the case of Imran Pratapgadi vs. State of Gujrat and another 2025 SCC Online SC 678 in an identical matter, where the cartoonist was alleged to have drawn a caricature that had hurt the feelings of the complainant. Thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed, and the applicant be released on anticipatory bail.

5. Counsel for the respondent / State as also the objector, on the other hand, have vehemently opposed the prayer and it is submitted that no case for anticipatory bail is made out. Counsel for the objector has submitted that in the name of freedom of expression, the applicant cannot be allowed to draw a caricature, which depicts the RSS of which the objector is also a Member, as also the Prime Minister of this country in an offensive and degrading manner. Counsel has also submitted that the applicant is in the habit of making such caricatures every now and then Signature Not Verified which can also be seen on his facebook page, disturbing the harmony of the society, and to maligning the reputation of the RSS, which is a social organization.

6. Heard. On due consideration of the rival submissions and perusal of the case diary, it is found that in the applicant's Facebook page which has been found to be objectionable by the complainant, RSS is shown in a human form with its Khaki shorts with a black belt and white shirt, which is the uniform of RSS. This man is bending over with his shorts pulled down and exposing his bottom to the caricature of the Prime Minister, who is shown with a stethoscope around his neck and who is also holding an injection in his hand, which he is administering on the bottom of the person bending over i.e. RSS. This caricature is tagged along with the lines, “gS f'ko ds vorkj] fiNokM+k gkftj gS] tkfr tux.kuk dk ,slk Mkst yxkbZ,s fd igyxkao oDQ cksMZ lc Hkwy tkm”, 7. In addition to that, the applicant has also made his own comments on the same in the following manner:

*

*bl rjg vki esjs fdlh Hkh dkVZwu dks viuh ethZ ls viuk uke vkSj O;aX; fy[k ds iz;kx dj ldrs gSa] esjk gj dkVZwu turk ds fy, turk ds }kjk turk dks lefiZr gS] HkkbZ ftlus Hkh fy[kk vPNk fy[k gS] ------- fe= Mukesh Upadhyay ji us Vsx fd;k]**

8. In the considered opinion of this court, on the face of it, the conduct of the applicant in depicting the RSS, which is a Hi