Marumakkathayam Law | Partition Is An Act By Which The Nature Of The Property Is Changed, Reflecting An Alteration In Ownership: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claim | Compensation Must Aim To Restore, As Far As Possible, What Has Been Irretrievably Lost: Supreme Court Awards Rs. 1.02 Crore Personal Criticism Of Judges Or Recording Findings On Their Conduct In Judgments Must Be Avoided: Supreme Court Efficiency In Arbitral Proceedings Is Integral To Effective Dispute Resolution. Courts Must Ensure That Arbitral Processes Reach Their Logical End: Supreme Court Onus Lies On The Propounder To Remove All Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding A Will To The Satisfaction Of The Court: Calcutta High Court Deeds of Gift Not Governed by Section 22-B of Registration Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Testimony Of  Injured Witness Carries A Built-In Guarantee Of Truthfulness: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempted Murder POCSO | Conviction Cannot Be Sustained Without Conclusive Proof Of Minority - Burden Lies On The Prosecution: Telangana High Court Credible Eyewitness Account, Supported By Forensic Corroboration, Creates An Unassailable Chain Of Proof That Withstands Scrutiny: Punjab and Haryana High Court Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Bail to Schizophrenic Mother Accused of Murdering Infant Son IT Act | Ambiguity in statutory notices undermines the principles of natural justice: Delhi High Court Dismisses Revenue Appeals Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction Under NDPS Act: Procedural Lapses Insufficient to Overturn Case Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Accused, Points to Possible Suicide Pact in "Tragic Love Affair" Tampering With Historical Documents To Support A Caste Claim Strikes At The Root Of Public Trust And Cannot Be Tolerated: Bombay High Court Offense Impacts Society as a Whole: Madras High Court Denies Bail in Cyber Harassment Case Custody disputes must be resolved in appropriate forums, and courts cannot intervene beyond legal frameworks in the guise of habeas corpus jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Insubordination Is A Contagious Malady In Any Employment And More So In Public Service : Karnataka High Court imposes Rs. 10,000 fine on Tribunal staff for frivolous petition A Show Cause Notice Issued Without Jurisdiction Cannot Withstand Judicial Scrutiny: AP High Court Sets Aside Rs. 75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand Timely Action is Key: P&H HC Upholds Lawful Retirement at 58 for Class-III Employees Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Not Applicable to Civil Court Orders: Patna High Court Uttarakhand High Court Dissolves Marriage Citing Irretrievable Breakdown, Acknowledges Cruelty Due to Prolonged Separation Prosecution Must Prove Common Object For An Unlawful Assembly - Conviction Cannot Rest On Assumptions: Telangana High Court

Tearing down illegal posters without provocation does not constitute an offense under Section 153 IPC: Kerala High Court Quashed FIR

16 October 2024 8:18 PM

By: sayum


Kerala High Court quashed the proceedings against Zara Michele Shilansky, an Australian tourist accused of tearing down posters at a Fort Kochi tourist spot. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas ruled that the act did not meet the necessary conditions under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code, which requires an illegal act done with the intent to provoke rioting. The case, which involved a complaint filed by the Students Islamic Organization (SIO), was dismissed as an abuse of process.

The case stemmed from an incident where Shilansky, perturbed by posters displaying the slogan "Silence is Violence - Stand Up for Humanity," removed the posters after being unsuccessful in having them removed through legal channels. These posters, believed to pertain to the Palestine-Israel conflict, were allegedly placed without permission. The complaint was lodged by a member of the SIO, leading to Shilansky’s arrest and subsequent detention at Kochi Airport under a lookout notice.

The central question was whether the petitioner’s actions, which involved removing posters placed illegally, could be considered an offense under Section 153 of the IPC, which deals with provocation leading to rioting.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas held that tearing down illegally placed posters, even if done by a private individual, could not be considered an illegal act or one meant to provoke rioting. The Court noted that the posters lacked the name of any organization and were not authorized, making their removal by the tourist non-provocative.

"The absence of any intent or provocation required to trigger rioting invalidates the charges under Section 153 IPC."

The Kerala High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against Zara Shilansky, ruling that her actions did not meet the legal threshold for incitement or provocation. The Court emphasized that prosecution based on such flimsy grounds was an abuse of the legal process.

Date of Decision: September 10, 2024

Zara Michele Shilansky v. State of Kerala & Others

Similar News