India has seen a sudden surge in attacks on places of worships belonging to minorities. The modus operandi across all such is almost similar, it includes a crowd surrounding or entering the place of worship accompanied by religious slogans of the majority. Such acts are often met with public outrage, hate speeches, politicisation of the issue at hand and eventually all eyes are set on the judiciary to safeguard the interests, impound the wrongdoers and reinstate communal harmony. The Karnataka High Court recently held[1]that shouting ‘Jai Sri Ram’ inside a mosque does not affect communal harmony. This judgment thus, comes in as a moment of reflection as to where the trajectory of religious tolerance in India is headed.
- Facts of the case
In the present case before Justice M. Nagaprasanna, the facts in germane are:
A complaint wasregistered on September 24, 2023 corresponding to an incident of some unknown persons who barged into the BadriaJummaMasjid at Mardhala in Aittoor Village of Karnataka, andshouted slogansof “Jai Sriram”, they were also alleged to have threatened not to spare the community. The CCTV footage revealed the presence of such unknown persons in the vicinity. Upon the complaint being drawn, the unknown persons were then identified. Apart from this, it was alleged that upon the perusal of the CCTV footage from the mosque, an unknown car was spotted near the premises. The offence, at the outset, is under Section 447 of the IPC which deals with criminal trespass. The other offences are under Sections 295A, 505 and 506 of the IPC. The complaint narrates that Hindus and Muslims in the jurisdiction of Kadaba Police Station are living in great harmony and these persons who have shouted ‘Jai Sriram’ are creating a rift between the communities. Therefore, the crime was registered.
- Questions before the court
Based on the allegations enlisted in the complaint, the court was to deliberate upon the culpability ofthe offence(s) so alleged. The allegations levied attracted various offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860(henceforth, IPC). These included: Section 295A (Outraging Religious Sentiments), Section 441(Criminal Trespass), Section 505 (Public Mischief), and Section 506 (Criminal Intimidation), alongside Section 34 (Acts Done by Several Persons in Furtherance of Common Intention).
The court considered the following:
- Whether the act of shouting ‘Jai Sriram’ would outrage the religious feeling of any class (and thereby attract the provisions of Section 295A of the IPC)?
- Whether the act of entering the Mosque by the unidentified persons constitutes ‘criminal trespass’ for the purpose of Section 441 of the code?
- Whether the act was such that it could induce or conduce public mischief(as under Section 505of the IPC)?
- Was the offence of criminal intimidation as under Section 503 (punishable under Section 506)made out against the petitioners?
[1]Keerthan Kumar and Ors. v. State of Karnataka (2024 SCC OnLine Kar 108)