Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

DELIBERATE INSULTS TO RELIGION NOT PROTECTED, CHARGE SHEET TO STAND – ALLH. HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court delivered a judgment regarding a social media case involving the alleged outraging of religious sentiments. The court dismissed an application seeking to quash the charge sheet and emphasized the importance of responsible online speech.

The case revolved around an objectionable message posted on WhatsApp regarding "Maa Durga," which had led to hurt sentiments among the Hindu community. The complainant had filed an FIR, resulting in a charge sheet being filed against the applicant under Sections 295A IPC and Section 67 of the I.T. Act, 2008.

During the proceedings, the applicant claimed innocence and asserted that they had received the message but did not send or forward it. However, the court took note of the evidence, including WhatsApp chats, indicating the applicant's admission of receiving and forwarding the message to other groups.

The court highlighted that Section 295A IPC penalizes deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings. It emphasized that not all acts would qualify as an offense and that unintentional or careless insults were not covered. The judgment stressed that freedom of expression on social media comes with responsibilities and does not grant unfettered license for language use.

The ruling recognized social media as a global platform for exchanging thoughts and opinions but emphasized the need for responsible speech. The court underlined that citizens do not have the right to speak without responsibility and that freedom of expression should be exercised while considering its special responsibilities and duties.

The court further noted that the charge sheet was supported by cogent and reliable evidence, as collected during the investigation. Considering the prima facie case made against the applicant, the court affirmed the decision to summon the applicant for trial.

Date :- 16.5.2023

Dr.Shiv Sidharth @ Shiv Kumar Bharti vs State Of U.P And Another     

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/16-May-2023-Dr-Shiv-Vs-State-Allh-HC.pdf"]                                   

Latest Legal News