S.295A IPC | Offences Affecting ‘Secular Fabric’ Of Country Can’t Be Compounded: Uttarakhand High Court
The Uttarakhand High Court has recently held that offences which outrage religious sentiments of communities and have tendency to affect ‘secular fabric’ of the country, cannot be compounded.While rejecting to compound an offence under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, the Single Judge Bench of Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma observed,“The wider reason, why these words...
The Uttarakhand High Court has recently held that offences which outrage religious sentiments of communities and have tendency to affect ‘secular fabric’ of the country, cannot be compounded.
While rejecting to compound an offence under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, the Single Judge Bench of Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma observed,
“The wider reason, why these words ‘socialist’, ‘secular’ and ‘democratic republic’ have been introduced in the Constitution are to inculcate in each and every citizen of this country, to have reciprocal respect and regards to the other religion. In the absence of the same, if this act of derogating the other’s religious sentiments is permitted to be continue, it rather acts as a parasite, which eats the society itself and creates an uncalled-for animosity resulting into public disorder and unrest.”
In this case, a complaint was registered against the petitioner, who claims to be the Deputy District Secretary of Rashtriya Hindu Vahini, Udham Singh Nagar, accusing him of using derogatory words for another religion and posting the same on his WhatsApp status. The petitioner approached the High Court to quash the pending case on the ground of amicable settlement.
However, the Court observed that before using the inherent power under Section 482 of the CrPC, it must be conscious as to whether the offence has wide social impact. It noted that offence punishable under Section 295A of the IPC has the tendency to affect the ‘secular fabric’ of the country and therefore, those cannot be compounded under Section 320 CrPC.
Stressing on the words ‘deliberate’ and ‘malicious’ used under Section 295A IPC, the Court opined,
“Deliberate means, it is a conscious act, made by a person belonging to a particular community to outrage the respect, which other religion equally enjoys in this country.”
It further observed,
“If being a citizen under Article 5 of the Constitution of India, if a person does not carry respect for other religion, it may lead to a certain catastrophic situation which at time becomes uncontrollable by the administration and particularly so called constructed religious groups of the country.”
Accordingly, the Court rejected to quash the pending complaint by compounding the case.
Case Title: Brajesh v. State of Uttarakhand
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Utt) 7
Case No.: C482 No. 706 of 2023
Order Dated: April 17, 2023
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, Advocate
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. Amit Bhatt, Dy. Advocate General for the State; Mr. Jasmeet Sahota, Advocate for Private Respondent