The Karnataka High Court ruled that chanting ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ does not constitute hate speech. Justice M. Nagaprasanna, a single-judge, granted relief to five individuals who were accused of promoting enmity between different groups and engaging in acts harmful to social harmony. The court determined that such slogans are not intended to incite division.
Bengaluru: Chanting “Bharat Mata ki Jai” is not considered hate speech and cannot be viewed as promoting religious disharmony or enmity, the Karnataka High Court ruled while dismissing an FIR filed against five men under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Justice M. Nagaprasanna, a single-judge bench, provided relief to the five individuals accused of allegedly promoting enmity between different groups and engaging in actions harmful to harmony.
Read Also: Hate Speech Case|| MP Government Informs Supreme Court To Watch on Social Media.
The court stated,
“In light of the afore-narrated facts and the judgments extracted supra, permitting even investigation into the case at hand would be prima facie permitting investigation into the sloganeering of ‘Bharath Matha Ki Jai,’ which can by no stretch of imagination be promoting disharmony or enmity amongst religions.”
In June of this year, five residents of Ullal taluk in Karnataka charged by the police. According to the court order, the petitioners were returning from an event celebrating Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s oath-taking ceremony on June 9 when they were attacked by a group of individuals.
The petitioners claimed that the group confronted, assaulted, and stabbed them because they were chanting “Bharat Mata ki Jai.” After the incident, the petitioners reported the attack to the police and lodged a complaint.
However, the following day, an FIR filed against them under various sections of the IPC, including Section 153A, which penalizes acts that promote enmity between different groups based on religion, race, or place of birth. The FIR stemmed from a complaint by a Muslim man who alleged that the petitioners had threatened him.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna observed that the case a retaliatory response to the complaint initially filed by the petitioners. He further noted that none of the criteria required to invoke Section 153A of the IPC were met.
Read Also: Supreme Court Fails to Hear Petitions on Hate Speech as Scheduled
The High Court said,
“Section 153A criminalizes actions that promote enmity between religious groups. In this case, it’s a clear example of the misuse of Section 153A. It is a counterblast to the petitioners’ original complaint. The petitioners were accused of shouting ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ and praising the Prime Minister, but the complainant’s allegations don’t even mention those actions. It appears that the complainant is attempting to protect themselves by targeting the petitioners. None of the essential elements of Section 153A are present in this case. A clear instance of retaliation is being framed as a crime under this section,”
As a result, the court quashed the FIR against the petitioners.
Senior Advocate M. Aruna Shyam and advocate Suyog Herale E represented the petitioners, while Additional SPP B.N. Jagadeesh appeared for the State.