'Criticism or abuse of socio-political figure not insult to religion': Bombay High Court

The court added that a person may represent a religion in some way, but that does not mean they become a religion themselves

Criticism or even crude abuse directed at a socio-political figure cannot be equated with insult to religion, the Bombay High Court has held. The observation was made while quashing a First Information Report (FIR) filed against a man for allegedly hurling abuses at Maratha leader and activist Manoj Jarange-Patil.

A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Hiten Venegavkar, sitting at Aurangabad, heard the case.

The FIR, registered in December 2023, accused the man of insulting religious sentiments under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, the judges ruled that the complaint did not indicate any attempt to insult religion or religious beliefs, according to a report by Live Law.

“The socio political figure may be admired or followed by several persons but criticism or even crude abuses directed upon such figure, however disrespectful or derogatory it may not by itself translate into an insult to a religion," the bench said in the judgement.

The court added that a person may represent a religion in some way, but that does not mean they become a religion themselves. “A person may represent a religion in certain ways but he/she does not become ‘religion’ by such representation."

The judges further noted that Section 295A protects religion as a system of belief or worship, however, does not extend that protection to “leaders of a caste, community of any movement".

According to the FIR, the incident took place at a local bar and restaurant, where the accused, allegedly under the influence of alcohol, hurled abuses at Jarange-Patil.

It was further taken into account that the applicant had forthwith apologised to the informant about the alleged incident, which the bench said, showed absence of intention to inflame communal violence or disturb the public order, the Live Law report mentioned.

“The phrase ‘religious feelings’ cannot draw similarity with wounded pride or political sentiments," the court said, adding that leaders, even if widely respected, are not beyond criticism.