Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

HIGH COURT QUASHES SEDITION FIR AGAINST SCHOOL: SCHOOL HAVE USED THE MINOR CHILDREN FOR PLAY CRITICIZING CAA, NRC  AND ABUSIVE LANGUAGE AGAINST PM MODI.

04 September 2024 10:16 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, has quashed the sedition FIR registered against four school officials for enacting a play that criticized government measures and made derogatory remarks against the Prime Minister. The court held that the play did not incite violence or create public disorder, emphasizing that citizens have the right to criticize government actions within reasonable limits.

The bench, presided over by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar, highlighted the importance of free speech and constructive criticism of government policies. Quoting from the judgement, the court stated, "A citizen has a right to criticize or comment upon the measures undertaken by the government and its functionaries, so long as he does not incite people to resort to violence against the government established by law or with the intention of creating public disorder."

The allegations against the petitioners, who were identified as Allauddin, Abdul Khaleq, Mohd. Bilal Inamdar, and Mohd. Mehatab, revolved around their involvement in the enactment of a play within the premises of Shaheen School in Bidar. The play allegedly portrayed potential consequences for Muslims if certain government enactments were implemented, while also featuring abusive language directed at the Prime Minister.

The court emphasized that the play was not intended to incite violence or promote enmity between different religious groups. It further underscored the responsibility of educational institutions to focus on imparting knowledge and nurturing young minds, rather than indulging in political criticism or insulting constitutional functionaries.

Quoting the judgement, the court stated, "The school is supposed to impart education and encourage learning among young minds... They should be fed with knowledge, technology, etc., which benefits them in their upcoming curriculum of academic period. Therefore the schools have to channelize the river of knowledge towards children for their welfare and betterment of society and not indulge in teaching the children to criticize the policies of the government."

The court ruled that the registration of the FIR for offenses under Sections 504, 505(2), 124A, 153A, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was without substance, and the continuation of the investigation would be an abuse of the legal process. The judgement referred to previous cases, including Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar and Vinod Dua v. Union of India, to establish the parameters of free speech and the offense of sedition.

Date of Decision:14th June 2023

ALLAUDDIN,S vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

Latest Legal News