The Supreme Court has discharged a man accused of hurting the religious sentiments of a government official by allegedly calling him “miyan-tiyan” and “Pakistani.” The court observed that while the remarks were in poor taste, they did not constitute an offence under Section 298 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and S C Sharma, in its order dated February 11, 2024, stated that the comments made by the accused did not amount to hurting the religious feelings of the complainant. “Undoubtedly, the statements made are in poor taste. However, it does not amount to hurting the religious sentiments of the informant. Hence, we are of the opinion that the appellant shall be discharged under Section 298 IPC,” the bench ruled.
The case originated when the accused, Hari Nandan Singh, sought information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act from the Additional Collector-cum-First Appellate Authority, Bokaro. Dissatisfied with the response, he filed an appeal. In November 2020, when the complainant, an Urdu Translator and Acting Clerk in the Sub-Divisional Office, Chas, visited Singh to provide the requested information, the accused allegedly made derogatory remarks about his religion and used criminal force to intimidate him. The complainant reported the matter to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chas, who directed the filing of an FIR.
Based on the investigation, police filed a chargesheet against Singh under multiple sections of the IPC, including Section 298 (deliberate intent to wound religious feelings), Section 504 (intentional insult to provoke breach of peace), Section 506 (criminal intimidation), Section 353 (assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from duty), and Section 323 (voluntarily causing hurt).
The Magistrate’s court, after taking cognisance of the charges, summoned Singh and ruled that there was sufficient material to frame charges under Sections 353, 298, and 504, while dismissing charges under Sections 323 and 406 due to a lack of evidence. Singh then sought discharge, but his plea was rejected at various judicial levels, including the Additional Sessions Judge-1, Bokaro, and later by the Jharkhand High Court on August 28, 2023.
The Supreme Court, however, ruled that there was no assault or use of force by Singh to justify charges under Section 353 IPC and stated that the High Court should have discharged him from this charge. The court also ruled that Singh could not be charged under Section 504 IPC, as his actions did not provoke a breach of peace. Consequently, Singh was discharged from both charges by the Supreme Court.
