LawChakra

Delhi HC Refused To Quash FIR Against DU Professor Over Post On ‘Shiva Linga’ In Gyanvapi Mosque: “Freedom of Speech Cannot Justify Hurting Sentiments”

Delhi HC Upholds FIR Against DU Professor: "Freedom of Speech Cannot Justify Hurting Sentiments"

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, presiding over the case, emphasized that laws penalizing deliberate attempts to outrage religious sentiments aim to balance free speech with the imperative to maintain social harmony.

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court refused to quash an FIR against a Hindu College history professor accused of allegedly hurting religious sentiments.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, presiding over the case, emphasized that laws penalizing deliberate attempts to outrage religious sentiments aim to balance free speech with the imperative to maintain social harmony.

The FIR was lodged against Ratan Lal on May 18, 2022, under IPC Sections 153A (promoting enmity between groups) and 295A (intentional and malicious acts to outrage religious feelings), following a social media post on May 14 about a Shivling allegedly found in the Gyanvapi mosque. Lal was arrested on May 20 and released on bail the following day.

The court, in its December 17 order, observed that Lal’s post had “prima facie” disrupted societal harmony and appeared intended to offend the sentiments of a significant section of society.

Justice Singh remarked,

“No individual, whether a professor, teacher, or intellectual, is entitled to make such remarks. Freedom of speech and expression, or any form of freedom, is not absolute.”

Lal had sought to quash the FIR, arguing that his post did not provoke unrest or disturbances in society and that, as a historian, he had expressed his views without malicious intent. However, the prosecution countered, asserting that the post demonstrated a clear intent to hurt the sentiments of Lord Shiva’s devotees and society at large.

The court emphasized Lal’s duty as a historian and educator, stating, “An intellectual bears the responsibility of guiding society and must exercise caution when making public statements, as their words carry influence. Negative statements, as in this case, risk creating unrest and disturbing societal peace. Sections 153A and 295A of the IPC ensure a balance between the right to free speech and the need for social harmony.”

Case Title: DR. RATAN LAL v. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE

Exit mobile version