Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

High Court Quashes FIR Against Ram Rahim - No Malice or Intent to Insult Religious Beliefs in Spiritual Discourse

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has quashed an FIR filed against the spiritual leader Saint Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh Insan, underlining a crucial observation that there was “no malice or intent to insult religious beliefs” in his discourse involving revered figures Sant Kabir Das and Guru Ravidas.

The decision, pronounced on October 30, 2023, by Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul, came as a relief to the petitioner, who had faced accusations of outraging religious feelings under Section 295A of the IPC. The Court meticulously examined the entirety of the discourse delivered by the petitioner and various historical texts, concluding that the narrative did not insult the religious sentiments or beliefs of any specific group.

Justice Kaul emphasized the importance of context in such matters, stating, “The entire discourse, including its theme and context would have to be thus considered and not just selective excerpts.” This statement was crucial in understanding the Court’s approach to discerning the intent behind the petitioner’s words.

The FIR, lodged seven years after the discourse in question, was highlighted as a point of contention. The Court noted the absence of any complaints in the preceding years, suggesting a lack of impact on religious sentiments at the time of the discourse.

Furthermore, the Court’s decision also underscored the significance of preventing abuse of the legal process. “When people file false and frivolous complaints, it seriously amounts to abuse of the process of law,” Justice Kaul remarked, reinforcing the need for judicial scrutiny in such cases.

This ruling not only resonates as a triumph for the petitioner but also sets a precedent in the delicate balance between freedom of speech and religious sentiments. It reiterates the judicial system’s role in safeguarding individuals against unwarranted accusations while respecting religious sensibilities.

Date of Decision: 30.10.2023

Saint Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh Insan  VS State of Punjab and another

Latest Legal News