The Supreme Court, today (25 JAN 2024), passed an interim order staying the criminal proceedings initiated against Samajwadi Party leader Swami Prasad Maurya for allegedly insulting the Shri Ramcharitmanas and inciting people to tear and burn pages of the Hindu epic.
“Why are you so touchy about these things? It is a matter of interpretation. It is a line of thought. How is it an offence? He (Maurya) cannot be held responsible for burning of copies,”
-said a bench of Justice B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta to additional advocate general (AAG) Sharan Dev Singh Thakur, appearing in advance on behalf of the Uttar Pradesh government.
Agreeing to examine the special leave petition filed by Maurya, the bench proceeded to issue notice to the state government and the complainant –
“at whose instance an FIR was lodged against the SP leader.”
The Supreme Court has put a temporary halt to the ongoing lower court proceedings by issuing a notice, which must be responded to within four weeks. Previously, in October 2023, the Allahabad High Court rejected an application by Maurya under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This application contested the charge sheet and summons issued by the Special Judge, which required Maurya to attend a trial.
Justice Subhash Vidyarthi of the bench observed that the charge sheet and accompanying documents preliminarily indicated sufficient grounds for Maurya to undergo trial in the lower court.
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court expressed the opinion that public officials should avoid engaging in actions that could disrupt communal peace.
The initial complaint by lawyer Santosh Kumar Mishra claimed that during protests, copies of the Ramcharitmanas-a 16th-century epic by poet Tulsidas based on the Ramayana were burned.
Subsequently, the City Kotwali police in Pratapgarh registered an FIR on February 1 of the previous year. The FIR named Maurya, Samajwadi Party MLA Dr R.K. Verma, and others, citing various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, including Sections 153, 295, 298, and 505.
CURRENT SCENARIO
Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Swami Prasad Maurya is facing backlash and legal action for his remarks on the revered Hindu text, Ramcharitmanas. Maurya’s comments, which have been deemed offensive by many, led to an FIR being lodged against him in Lucknow for allegedly hurting religious sentiments.
The FIR, filed by Lucknow resident Shivendra Mishra at the Hazratganj police station, accuses Maurya of violating several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including 295-A, 298, 504, 505(2), and 153-A. These sections pertain to deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings, and promoting enmity between different groups.
In his controversial statement made to a news channel on January 22, 2024 Maurya criticized the Ramcharitmanas, authored by Goswami Tulsidas in the 17th century, for promoting social discrimination and spreading hatred. He argued,
“Religion is meant for the welfare of humanity and for strengthening it. If there is any insult to a section of society due to certain lines in the Ramcharitmanas on the basis of ‘jaati’, ‘varn’ and ‘varg’, then it is certainly not ‘dharma’, it is ‘adharma’.” Maurya specifically pointed out lines in the text that mention castes like ‘teli’ and ‘kumhaar’, and called for a ban on these “objectionable portions”.
The response to Maurya’s remarks has been swift and severe. The seer community across Uttar Pradesh has condemned his statements, with some urging the chief minister to take action. The management of Lete Hanuman Ji temple in Lucknow’s Chowk area has gone as far as banning Maurya’s entry, with a banner at the temple’s main entrance declaring,
“A person who does not have faith in religion should not be allowed to enter a religious site,”
as stated by Vivek Tangri of the temple management committee.
Amidst the uproar, the Samajwadi Party, led by Akhilesh Yadav, has distanced itself from Maurya’s remarks. Senior SP leader and Jaswant Nagar MLA Shivpal Yadav clarified,
“Those are his personal views, and not of the party’s. We are followers of Lord Ram and Lord Krishna and their ideals.”
This incident highlights the sensitive nature of religious texts in Indian politics and the fine line political figures must tread when discussing matters of faith and tradition.
FOLLOW US ON X(TWITTER) FOR MORE AND BRISK LEGAL UPDATES.
