Justice Amit Borkar held that their comic act did not disclose the alleged offence of outraging religious feelings under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as there was no malicious intent to hurt religious sentiments.
The Court reiterated that criminal law should not be invoked in a casual manner against an artist or a programme judge merely because somebody feels insulted by a performance that is viewed out of context.
For an offence to be made out, there must a deliberate targetting of religious feelings and malicious intent, which was missing in this case, the Court found.
“The words which are said to be objectionable are ‘Ya Allah! Rasgulla! Dahi Bhalla!’ The Petitioners say that these are only words used in rhyme and comic effect. The submission is that ‘Dahi Bhalla’ and ‘Rasgulla’ are common food items, known and consumed by people across communities, and there is no religious colour in those expressions. This contention cannot be brushed aside. The words by themselves are neutral in ordinary social use. Mere mention of food items in a comic act cannot amount to insult of religion. Something more is required. There must be material to show that the words were selected as a weapon of offence,” the Court noted.
The Court passed the ruling on petitions filed in 2012 by Suman and Singh challenging a 2010 FIR that was registered on the basis of a complaint by Raza Academy president Mohd Imran Dadani Rasabi.
