Delhi High Court Rejects Suit Against Waseem Rizvi's Book 'Muhammad' For Allegedly Making Incendiary Statements Against Islam & Prophet Mohammed

The Delhi High Court has rejected a suit filed against Syed Waseem Rizvi's Book 'Muhammad' alleging that it contained various demeaning and incendiary statements about Islam, Holy Quran and Prophet Mohammed. Justice Sanjeev Narula dismissed the suit filed by Qamar Hasnain which had sought permanent injunction restraining Rizvi from making statements or publishing the impugned remarks. It also sought permanent injunction restraining Rizvi from selling distributing or circulating the book through any medium. Hasnain had also sought damages Rs.2,05,00,000 with a view to discourage Rizvi from committing similar acts in the future. "Any injury or hurt to personal religious sentiments of the Plaintiff are not an actionable wrong under the law of torts. At best, a case may have been made under provisions of criminal law, which has certainly neither been pleaded nor would bestow any maintainability to the case before this Court," the Court said. It was the case of the plaintiff that certain contents of the book were damaging to communal peace and harmony as Rizvi had allegedly used derogatory and denigrating language against Prophet Muhammad. It was also submitted that the said contents were offensive, hateful and distressing to even a casual reader and therefore Rizvi's action was not protected under the ambit of the fundamental right to Freedom of Speech and Expression as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The Court noted that a representative suit for a public nuisance or other wrongful acts affecting, or likely to affect the public, has to fulfil the requirements of law and it needs to be specifically averred."For such suits, amongst other requirements as provided under Section 91 of CPC, a suit if not filed by the Advocate General, has to be filed by two or more persons with the leave of the Court. Under this provision, a party can perhaps approach the Court for an illegal act which in its nature tends to cause injury of public at large. However, for a representative action, it is indispensable that reliance is placed upon such provisions of the statute," the Court added. During the course of hearing, the counsel appearing for the plaintiff stated that Hasnain had approached in his individual capacity and had sought to exercise a right in rem as being aggrieved by an insult to his religious sentiments. He also argued that the objectionable content of the impugned book harmed Hasnain's personal reputation as a Muslim."Indeed, the Plaintiff has not invoked Order I, Rule 8 or Section 91 of the CPC, and thus, the present suit does not fall within the purview of the afore-noted provisions. In these circumstances, the suit lacks foundation particularly since the reliefs sought are representative and not in personam," the Court said. The Court took note of the fact that the plaintiff had sought permanent and mandatory injunction on behalf of the followers of the religion of Islam which was a right in rem and that in order maintain such a suit, it is essential that there should be a personal legal right, a corresponding personal legal injury, and an act which gives rise to legal or actual damage. "No caselaw has been shown by Mr. Khan in support of the proposition advanced by him. A vague mention was made to an Allahabad High Court case from 1918, but even after granting a pass-over today, the same could not be produced before the Court. A reference was also made to Law Commission Report No. 267 on 'Hate Speech', which too, is of no consequence. Though the fulcrum of the Plaintiff's argument centres around the reasonable restrictions to the Defendant's right of freedom of speech and expression, these are arguments on merits, and once the jurisdiction of this Court is ousted, the same cannot be examined by this Court in the present proceedings," the Court observed. For the aforesaid reasons, the suit was rejected. Title: QAMAR HASNAIN v. SYED WASEEM RIZVI & ORSClick Here To Read Order

Delhi High Court Rejects Suit Against Waseem Rizvi's Book 'Muhammad' For Allegedly Making Incendiary Statements Against Islam & Prophet Mohammed

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Delhi High Court Rejects Suit Against Waseem Rizvi's Book 'Muhammad' For Allegedly Making Incendiary Statements Against Islam & Prophet Mohammed

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers