- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12806 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SRI BASANAGOUDA R PATIL (YATNAL) S/O RAMANAGOUDA B PATIL AGED 61 YEARS OCC MLA VIJAYAPURA CONSTITUENCY OLD IB, STATION ROAD, VIJAYAPURA - 586 101 KARNATAKA ALSO AT SINDAGI ROAD MAHAL AINAPUR AINAPURA BIJAPUR KARNATAKA - 586 104 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH DALWAI, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MUDHOL POLICE STATION BAGALKOT-583236 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560001 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M., HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED QUASH FIR IN CR.NO.264/2024 REGISTERED BY THE MUDHOL POLICE STATION, PENDING XLII ADDL. CMM COURT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 191(1)(a) AND 353(2) OF BNS, 2023 PRODUCED AT DOCUMENT NO.1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the registration of a crime in Crime No.264/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 196(1)(a) and 353(3) of the BNS, 2023. 2. Heard Sri. Venkatesh Dalwai, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Waheeda M.M., learned HCGP appearing for the respondent and have perused the material on record. 3. The petitioner, a member of the Legislative Assembly gets embroiled in a crime in Crime No.264/2024 for - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 the afore-quoted offences. It is the case of the respondent- police that while registering a suo moto case against the petitioner, that the petitioner was invited to speak at a Ganesha Festival on 19.09.2024 and has allegedly given a speech that would become the ingredients of Section 505(2) of the IPC or 353(2) of the BNS, 2023. The said suo motu complaint becomes a crime in Crime No.264/2024. Registration of the crime has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the ingredients of the offence under Section 505(2) of the IPC or Section 353(2) or the BNS is not met even to its semblance and would seek to place reliance upon the judgment of this Court on the same issue on identical set of facts. This Court in Crl.P.No.10145/2024 dated 30.01.2025, has held as follows: "7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute and requires no reiteration. The issue lies in a narrow compass. Since the entire issue has sprung from the complaint, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint. It reads as follows: "UÉ
ಾನ  ಎ ಐ ಾನೂನು ಮತು ಸುವವೆ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 ಬಂ ಾಪರ ೕಸ ಾೆ.
ಾನೆ, ಾನು ! "ೊಡ$ಮ%,  ಎ ಐ ತ%&ಾ '(ಾಗ, ವಯಸು+ 52 ವಷ-, ಉ"ೋಗ  ಎ ಐ ಬಂ ಾಪರ ೕಸ ಾೆ, /ೕ0ೈ2 ನಂಬರ: 9480796063 %ೕಡುವ ಗಣ4ೕಕೃತ ಸ ಾ-7 ತೕ- ದೂರು. 9ಾಂಕ: 13-10-2023 ೇ ಇ;< ತರು=ಾಯ. ಾನು ಕ>ೆದ ಒಂದು ವಷ-9ಂದ ಬಂ ಾಪರ ೕಸ ಾೆಯ@ ತ%&ಾ '(ಾಗದ  ಎ ಐ ಅಂBಾ ಕತ-ವ %ವ-CಸುDಾ ಬಂ9ದುE ಇರುತ"ೆ. 9ಾಂಕ: 07-10-2023 ರಂದು Cಂದೂ ಮFಾಗಣಪG ೇ=ಾ ಸHG 7 ೆಹರು Jಾಡ-K ಕHೕL ಬಂ ಾಪರ ಆ 9ನ ಾಯಂ ಾಲ OPೕ ಬಸನJೌಡ ಾಮನJೌಡ RಾLೕಲ ಾ: ಯDಾSಳ Uಾಸಕರು 'ಜಯಪರ 'Wಾನಸ(ಾ XೇತP ಇವರು ಗಣಪG 'Uೇಷ ಪYZೆJೆ ಆಗHಸುGದುE, Cಂದೂ ಮFಾ ಗಣಪG ೇ=ಾ ಸHG ವG[ಂದ Cಂದೂ ಜನ ZಾಗೃG ಸ
ಾ=ೇಶದ@ (ಾಷಣ
ಾಡುವವರು ಇ"ಾEೆ ಅಂDಾ 0ಾG] ^ೕೆJೆ ಾೆ[ಂದ ನನJೆ ಮತು ಎ.ಎ.ಐ ಎK ಅಗ;ಮ%, ಮತು ;ಬ_ಂ9ಯವಾದ Fೆ` ; 996, 1433, ; 1133, 1136, 882, 931 ಇವ7Jೆ ಕತ-ವ ೆa %bೕ!;ದುE ಇದುE ಅದರಂDೆ ಾಯಂ ಾಲ ಬಸನJೌಡ ಾಮನJೌಡ RಾLೕಲ ಾ: ಯDಾSಳ ಇವರು ಮತು ಇತರರು 0ೈc ZಾDಾದ ಮೂಲಕ ಬಂದು ಗಣಪGJೆ ಪY!; ನಂತರ ೇ7"ೆ. ಜನರನುS ಉ"ೆEೕO; ಆ 9ನ 9ಾಂಕ: 07-10-2023 ರಂದು 18-10 ಗಂdೆJೆ Cಂದೂ ಮFಾ ಗಣಪG ೇ=ಾ ಸHG ವG[ಂದ Cಂದೂ ಜನ ZಾಗೃG ಸ
ಾ=ೇಶವ ಜರುeದುE ಸದರ Cಂದೂ ಜನZಾಗೃG ಸ
ಾ=ೇಶದ Cಂದು ಮFಾ ಸ(ಾ ಗಣಪG ೇ=ಾ ಸHG, ಅಂದೆ ಶ4, ಗಣಪG ಎಂದೆ ಮು4, ಬಂ ಾಪರದ ಗಣಪG ಶ4 /ದಲು. JೊGರfಾ@, ಗಣಪGಯನುS ಸ<ಲg ತBೆಯುವ ಪPಯತS
ಾh"ಾಗ ನಮ] ಗಣಪನ ಶ4 ಇh ಕನSಡ ಾhJೆ Gi[ತು. ಾಂJೆP ಸ ಾ-ರ ಬDಾ- ಇದE FಾJೆ 0ೆಳJಾ'ಯ@ Rಾ4ಾನ ಧkಜ Fಾ9"ೆ ಅವೆಲ@ ಸ ಾ-ರದ /ಮ]ಕaಳl ಇದು ಗಣಪG ಭಕರ ಶ4, ಾ=ೆfಾ@ UೆPೕಷn=ಾದ ಸಾತನ ಧಮ- ೆa ೇ7ದವರು, 'ಶ<ದ ಕfಾಣ ಾae ಇರುವರು, ಇದನುS ೆಲವರು ಅವFೇಳನ
ಾಡುG"ಾEೆ, ನನJೆ ಅಾಯ=ಾದೆ ಸುಮ]ೆ ಕೂಡುವ9fಾ@. (ಾರತ "ೇಶ ಈ ಸಂಸpGಯ ಆWಾರದ ^ೕfೆ ಎಲ@ರನುS ಒಗೂqh; ೊಂಡು ಬಂ9"ೆ. ಆದೆ ೆಲವ "ೇಶಗಳ@ ಈ ಸಂಸpG ಇfಾ@ ನಮ] ಸಂಸpGಯ 'ರುದr
ಾತಾಡುವರ 'ರುದr ಧk% ಎತಲು ಾ=ೆfಾ@ ಒಂ"ಾಗ0ೇಕು. ೆಲವ7Jೆ (ಾರತ ಶ4Uಾsಾಗುವದು, ಸುಭದP=ಾeರಲು ಇtಾu ಇfಾ@, ನಮ] ಸರ ಾರದ@ sಾವ"ೇ ಗಲ0ೆsಾ"ಾಗ ಾವ ದಂJೆ ೋಧ7Jೆ ತಕa OXೆ %ೕh"ೆEವ, ಾಂJೆPೕ ಸರ ಾರ ಬಂದ ^ೕfೆ 0ೆಳJಾ'ಯ@ Rಾ4ಾನದ ಧkZಾ Fಾಾh"ೆ. ಧkಜ Fಾಾh;ದವರು Rಾ4ಾನದ /ಮ]ಕaಳl. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 Oವ/ಗq, ೋfಾರದ@ ಗಲ(ೆಗ>ಾe"ೆ. ೕಸರ ^ೕfೆ ಕಲು@ ತುಾhದುE ಸಣvಘಟೆ ಎಂದು FೇಳlG"ಾEೆ, ನಮ] ಹುಡುಗುರು ಇೊSಬ_ರ =ೇಶ Fಾ4 ೊಂಡು ಗಲ(ೆ
ಾಡುವಂತ Fೇhಗಳಲ@. ೆಲವ7Jೆ ಗಣಪನ ^ರವyJೆ ಅವರ ಓyಯ@ Fೋದೆ ಉ7ಯುತ"ೆ. ಈ ಮಕaಳl ನಮ] "ೇಶದ ಅನS Gಂದು Rಾ4ಾK !ಂ"ಾ0ಾ{ ಅನುSG"ಾEೆ. 2024ರ ನಂತರ Rಾ4ಾನ ದ@ ಗಣಪGಯನುS ಪPGtಾnಪೆ
ಾಡುDೇ=ೆ. Rಾ4ಾನದ ಯುವಕರು /ೕ9 ಪPWಾ% 0ೇಕು ಅಂDಾೆ, ನಮ] ೆಲವರು Rಾ4ಾನ 4 Zೈ ಅಂDಾರು Fೈ0ೆP| ತiಯ ಾಯಕರು ಮು;@ಂೆfಾ@ ನಮJೆ ಓಟು Fಾ4"ಾEೆ ಎಂದು Fೇi ೊಳl}Dಾೆ. CಂದುಗiJೆ ಒಂ"ಾe ಒಂದುಕBೆ ಒdಾue ಓಟು Fಾಕಲು ಶ4ವಂತಾಗ0ೇಕು. ಾವ Cಂದುಗಳl "ಾH-ಕ ಕುಟುಂಬ ಎನುSವದನುS RಾಸುDೇ=ೆ ನಮ] ಸಂಾaರ, ಅದು ನಮ] ಬಲCೕನDೆಯfಾ@, ಸಾಥನ ಧಮ-ವನುS Fಾಳl
ಾಡಲು ಇGFಾಸದ@ ಎಂDೆಂತವರ ಪPಯತS ಪಟuರು ನಮ] ಸಾತನ ಧಮ-ವನುS 4ಂ•ತು ಅiJಾhಸಲು ಆefಾ@, ಈ ಬಂಡು ೋರರು ನಮ]ೆSೕನು
ಾಡಲು ಆಗುತ"ೆ? ನಲವತು ವಷ-9ಂದ ಈ ಬಂ ಾಪರದ ಸಂಘಟೆ ಭಷu=ಾಗತfೆ ಬರುG"ೆ ಾನು Zಾಪರದ@ ನನJೆ ಾಬರ ಓಟು 0ೇ ಾeಲ@ ಅಂತ Fೇi"ೆEೕ=ೆ ನಮ]ವದು ಸಂಘಟೆsಾe"ಾEೆ ನಮ]ವೇ €ೕಟು Fಾ4ದೆ ಾಕು 20 ವಷ-ದ Cಂ"ೆ ಕನSಡ ಕ;ದ ^ೕಡಂJೆ ಕನSಡ ಕತ ಹುಡುಗೇ ^ೕಡಮ]%Jೆ ಕಲು@ ಒJೆಯಲು Fೋe"ಾEೆ. ಅಕu• ಎಂದೂ ಮುಂ"ೆ ಬಂದು ಯುದr
ಾhಲ@. ಈಗ ಈ ಮಕaಳl ನಮJೆ ಜಂ0ೆ Dೋ7ಸುDಾೆ ನಮ] ಮೆಯ@ಯ ಜಂ0ೆ ಉ>ಾ}ಗh$ Fೆ‚ಾƒc ಇಲ@. ಮುಸfಾ]ನರು ಎಂದೂ ನಮ] ಅಣv ತಮ]ಂ9ರು ಆಗುವ9ಲ@ %ೕವ ಸುಮ]ೆ Giದು ೊಂh9Eೕ7 0ಾ[ 0ಾ[ ಅಂತ FೇಳlG9Eೕ7 ಆದೆ ಅವರು ತಮ] ಬು9EಯನುS Dೋ7ಸ"ೇ ಡುವ9ಲ@. ಮುಸfಾ]ನರು ಅವರು ನಮJೆ ಎಂದೂ Cಂದುಗಳl ಅನುSವ9ಲ@ ನಮ] =ೈ7ಗಳl ಅಂತ FೇಳlDಾೆ ಆ =ೇ>ೆಯ@ %ೕವ FೇJೆ ಅಣv-ತಮ]ಂ9ಾಗುGೕ7. %ೕವ sಾ=ಾಗfಾದರೂ ಮ;ೕ9 ^ೕfೆ "ಾi
ಾh9Eೕಾ ಆದೆ Oವ/ಗqದ@ Cಂದುಗಳ ^ೕfೆ "ಾi
ಾh"ಾEೆ. sಾವ ಸು>ೇಮಗ ಅವ ಔರಂಗZೇಬ, ಅಕu•, ಮFಾಾಾ ಪPDಾಪ ಅಂದೆ ಚh$ಯ@ ಹು‚ೆƒ ಹುಯುE ೊಳl}GದE. ನಮ] Cಂದು ಶ4ಯನುS Dೋ7ಸ0ೇಕು ಅಂತ ಮುಂDಾe
ಾತಾhದರು. ಸದ7ಯವರು (ಾಷಣವನುS ಾಯಂ ಾಲ 06-10 ಘಂdೆJೆ RಾPರಂಭ=ಾe 07-30 ಘಂdೆJೆ (ಾಷಣ ಮು ಾಯ ಆeದುE ಇರುತ"ೆ. ಬಸನJೌಡ ಾಮನJೌಡ RಾLೕಲ ಾಃ ಯDಾSಳ ಇವರು ''ಧ ಗುಂಪ, ZಾG- ZಾGಗಳ ಮದ, "ೆ<ೕಷವನುSಂಟು
ಾಡುವದು ಮತು ಸFೌಧ-DೆJೆ 0ಾದಕ=ಾಗುವ ಕೃತಗಳನುS
ಾಡಲು (ಾಷಣ9ಂದ ''ಧ ಮGೕಯ ಮೂಲವಂOಯ ಮತು ೋಮುಗಳ ನಡು=ೆ ಅೌFಾಧ-ವನುS ಅಥ=ಾ =ೈರ, "ೆ<ೕಷ, =ೈಮನ;+K (ಾವೆಗಳನುS Fೆ•ƒಸಲು ಾವ-ಜ%ಕ ೆಡು4Jೆ ಾರಣ=ಾಗುವ ಮGೕಯ "ೆ<ೕಷ(ಾಷಣ
ಾhದುE ಇರುತ"ೆ. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 ಆ ಾಲ ೆa ಾನು ಾಯ-cರಮದ RಾPರಂಭ9ಂದ ಮು ಾಯ=ಾಗುವವೆಗೂ ಬಂ"ೋಬ ಕತ-ವ %ವ-ಹೆ"ೊಂ9Jೆ ಾನು ೇi; ೊಂhದುE, ಮತು ೋhದುE ಾೆಯ ;ಬ_ಂ9ಗಳl ಅಲ@"ೇ  .; 931 ೇದವರು (ಾಷಣವನುS ಾೆಯ ಾ
ಾಾದ@ •GPಕ7;ದುE, ಈ 9ನ ಾೆಯ ;ಬ_ಂ9 'hbೕವನುS ; h ಮೂಲಕ ತುಂ ; ೊಂಡು ಬಂದು Fಾಜರಪh;ದುE, ಈಗ ೋh &ಾGP
ಾh ೊಂಡು ತಡ=ಾe ದೂರು %ೕhದುE ಆ"ೆ. ಬಸನJೌಡ ಾಮನJೌಡ RಾLೕಲ ಾ: ಯDಾSಳ ಇವರ ^ೕfೆ ಕಲಂ 505(2) ಐ; ೇದEರ ಅhಯ@ ಸ ಾ-7 ತ- ದೂರು ಇರುತ"ೆ. ತಮ] 'Uಾ<;." A perusal of the complaint afore-quoted, the point that arises for consideration is, whether the complaint would meet the ingredients of Section 505(2) of the IPC. 8. Section 505(2) of the IPC reads as follows: "505. Statements conducing to public mischief. (1) xxx (2) Statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes.-- Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement or report NC:2024:KHC:51256 containing rumour or alarming news with intent to create or promote, or which is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or illwill between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both." The purport and the necessary ingredients of Section 505(2) of IPC need not detain this Court for long or delve deep into the matter. The Apex Court in the case of BILAL AHMED KALOO VS. STATE OF ANDRA PRADESH reported in (1997) 7 SCC 431, interpreting Section 505(2) of the IPC, has held as follows: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 “…. …. …. 10. Section 153A was amended by the Criminal and Election Laws (Amendment) Act 1969 - Act No.XXXV of 1996. It consists of three clauses of which clauses (a) and (b) alone are material now. By the same amending Act sub-section (2) was added to Section 505 of the Indian Penal Code. Clauses (a) & (b) of Section 153A and Section 505(2) are extracted below: "153-A. Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.- (1) Whoever- (a) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, or (b) commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity, or (c) * * * Shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both." 505(2) Statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill- will between classes.- Whoever makes, publishes or - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 circulates any statement or report containing rumour or alarming news with intent to create or promote, or which is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill- will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both." The common ingredient in both the offences is promoting feeling of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious or racial or linguistic or regional groups or castes or communities. Section 153A covers a case where a person by "words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations" promotes or attempts to promote such feeling. Under Section 505(2), promotion of such feeling should have been done by making and publishing or circulating any statement or report containing rumour or alarming news. 11. This Court has held in Balwant Singh and another vs. State of Punjab (1995) 3 SCC 214) that mens rea is a necessary ingredient for the offence under Section 153A. Mens rea is an equally necessary postulate for the offence under Section 505(2) also as could be discerned from the words "with intent to create or promote or which is likely to create or promote" as used in that sub- section. 12. The main distinction between the two offences is that publication of the word or representation is not necessary under the former, such publication is sine qua non under - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 Section 505. The words "whoever makes, publishes or circulates" used in the setting of Section 505(2) cannot be interpreted disjunctively but only as supplementary to each other. If it is construed disjunctively, any one who makes a statement falling within the meaning of Section 505 would, without publication or circulation, be liable to conviction. But the same is the effect with Section 153A also and then that Section would have been bad for redundancy. The intention of the legislature in providing two different sections on the same subject would have been to cover two different fields of similar colour. The fact that both sections were included as a package in the same amending enactment lends further support to the said construction. 13. xxx 14. In Sunilakhya Chowdhury vs. H.M. Jadwet and another (AIR 1968 Calcutta 266) it has been held that the words "makes or publishes any imputation" should be interpreted as words supplementing each other. A maker of imputation without publication is not liable to be punished under that section. We are of the view that the same interpretation is warranted in respect of the words "makes, publishes or circulates" in Section 505 IPC also. 15. The common feature in both sections being promotion of feeling of enmity, hatred or ill-will "between different" religious or racial or language or regional groups or castes and communities it is necessary that atleast two such groups or communities should be involved. Merely inciting the felling of one community or group without any reference to any other community or - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 group cannot attract either of the two sections. 16. The result of the said discussion is that appellant who has not done anything as against any religious, racial or linguistic or regional group or community cannot be held guilty of either the offence under Section 153A or under Section 505(2) of IPC.” (Emphasis supplied) Later, the Apex Court in the case of MANZAR SAYEED KHAN V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA reported in (2007) 5 SCC 1 “…. …. …. 15. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties. The question to be decided now is whether the paragraph complained of would attract the penal consequences envisaged in Section 153-A IPC. Section 153-A IPC was amended by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1969 (Act 35 of 1969). It consists of three clauses of which clauses (a) and (b) alone are material for the case on hand, which read as under: “153-A. Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.—(1) Whoever— (a) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, or (b) commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquility, or (c)*** shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.” 16. Section 153-A IPC, as extracted hereinabove, covers a case where a person by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities or acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity. The gist of the offence is the intention to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of people. The intention to cause disorder or incite the people to violence is the sine qua non of the offence under Section 153-A IPC and the prosecution has to prove prima facie the existence of mens rea on the part of the accused. The intention has to be judged primarily by the language of the book and the circumstances in which the book was written and published. The matter complained of within the ambit of Section 153-A must be read as a whole. One cannot rely on strongly worded and isolated passages for proving the charge nor indeed can one take a sentence here and a sentence - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 there and connect them by a meticulous process of inferential reasoning. 17. In Ramesh v. Union of India [(1988) 1 SCC 668 : 1988 SCC (Cri) 266 : AIR 1988 SC 775] this Court held that TV serial Tamas did not depict communal tension and violence and the provisions of Section 153-A IPC would not apply to it. It was also not prejudicial to the national integration falling under Section 153-B IPC. Approving the observations of Vivian Bose, J. in Bhagwati Charan Shukla v. Provincial Govt. [AIR 1947 Nag 1] the Court observed that “the effect of the words must be judged from the standards of reasonable, strong-minded, firm and courageous men, and not those of weak and vacillating minds, nor of those who scent danger in every hostile point of view. … It is the standard of ordinary reasonable man or as they say in English law ‘the man on the top of a Clapham omnibus’.” (Ramesh case [(1988) 1 SCC 668 : 1988 SCC (Cri) 266 : AIR 1988 SC 775] , SCC p. 676, para 13) 18. Again in Bilal Ahmed Kaloo v. State of A.P. [(1997) 7 SCC 431 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 1094] it is held that the common feature in both the sections viz. Sections 153-A and 505(2), being promotion of feeling of enmity, hatred or ill will “between different” religious or racial or linguistic or regional groups or castes and communities, it is necessary that at least two such groups or communities should be involved. Further, it was observed that merely inciting the feeling of one community or group without any reference to any other community or group cannot attract either of the two sections. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 19. Prof. James W. Laine, the author of the book, has exercised his reason and his own analytical skills before choosing any literature which he intends to include in his book. Even if the appellant Manzar Sayeed Khan, a constituted attorney of Oxford University Press, India and the appellant Vinod Hansraj Goyal, proprietor of Rashtriya Printing Press, Shahdara, Delhi, or the persons whose names are mentioned in the acknowledgment by the author, have provided information for the purpose, including the said paragraph in the book, it is important and worth observing that the author has mentioned that BORI, Pune has been his scholarly home in India and many people therein helped him for collecting the material. The author has given the names of many persons, who had helped him in one way or the other and enlightened him about the history of the historical hero “Shivaji”. The author has also mentioned in the book about the International Conference on Maharashtra, etc. which has given him a lot of material for inclusion in his book. As it appears from the records, BORI, Pune was established almost 90 years back and it has a great tradition of scholarly work. It is very improbable to imagine that any serious and intense scholar will attempt to malign the image of this glorious institute. The author thought his work to be worthy of dedication to his mother, Marie Whitwell Laine, which was purely a scholarly pursuit and without any intention or motive to involve himself in trouble. It is the sole responsibility of the State to make positive efforts to resolve every possible conflict between any of the communities, castes or religions within the State and try every possible way to establish peace and harmony within the State under every and all circumstances. 20. In State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 426 : AIR 1992 SC 604] this Court has observed that an FIR can be quashed if it does not disclose an offence and there is no need for any investigation or recording of any statement.” (Emphasis supplied) If the complaint as afore-quoted is considered on the touchstone of the principles elucidated by the Apex Court in the judgments afore-quoted, the inevitable inference would be obliteration of the crime. 9. It becomes apposite to refer to the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of STATE OF HARYANA V. BHAJAN LAL reported in 1992 Supp. 1 SCC 335, wherein the Apex Court holds as follows: “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a noncognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” (Emphasis supplied) - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 10. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER a. The criminal petition is allowed. b. The impugned crime in Crime No.131/2023, pending before the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC, Siggaon, Haveri, qua the petitioner, stands quashed." 5. Learned HCGP though would refute the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the counsel for the petitioner would not dispute the position of law as laid down by this Court in the afore-extracted judgment. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 7. Since the entire issue is now triggered from the complaint and the complaint triggering from the incident that happens on 20.09.2024, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint in its entirety, which reads as follows: ¢£ÁAPÀ:20.09.2024 ಮುWೋಳ ೕ ಾೆ UÉ - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 ೕ ಸˆ ಇನ+Rೆಕu•( ಾ&ಸು) ಮುWೋಳ ೕಸ ಾೆ ಇವ7Jೆ,
ಾನೆ, ಾನು ೆ. .
ಾಂಗ ವsಾ: 59 ವಷ- ೕ ಸˆ ಇನ+Rೆಕu•(ಅ.') ಮುWೋಳ ೕ ಾೆ /0ೈ2 ನಂ: 9663057599 ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ಗಣ4ೕಕರಣ
ಾh; ೊಂಡು ಸ.ತ ‰sಾ-9 ಏೆಂದೆ, ಾನು ಈಗ 4 ವಷ-ಗiಂದ ಮುWೋಳ ೕ ಾೆಯ@ ೕ ಸˆ ಇನ+Rೆಕu•(ಅ.') ಅಂDಾ ಕತ-ವ %ವ-CಸುG"ೆEೕೆ. %ೆSಯ 9ವಸ 9ಾಂಕ: 19.09.2024 ರಂದು ಮುWೋಳ ಶಹರದ ಜನDಾ Rಾ@Lನ@ರುವ Cಂದೂ ಮFಾಗಣಪG ಜನDಾ ಾZಾ ಗೇಶ 'ಸಜ-ೆ ಾಯ-ಕPಮ ಹH] ೊಂhದುE, ಆ ಾಲ ೆa ªÀiÁ£Àå J¸ï ¦ ಾFೇಬರು Fಾಗೂ
ಾನ Fೆಚುƒವ7 ಎ ಾFೇಬರು 0ಾಗಲ ೋdೆ ರವರ ಉಸು=ಾ7ಯ@ ಮತು
ಾನ hಎ ಾFೇಬರು ಜಮಖಂh,
ಾನ ;ಐ ಮುWೋಳ ರವರ ೇತೃತ<ದ@ 0ಾಗಲ ೋಟ !fೆ@ಯ ೕ ಅŒ ಾ7ಗಳl ಮತು ;ಬ_ಂ9ಯವ7Jೆ ಬಂ"ೋಬ; ಕತ-ವ ೆa ೇHಸfಾeತು. ಅದರಂDೆ %ೆSಯ 9ವಸ 20.00 ಗಂdೆJೆ ಮುWೋಳ ನಗರದ ಜನDಾ Rಾ@ಟದ@ ಇರುವ Cಂದೂ ಮFಾಗಣಪG ಜನDಾ ಾಜ ಗೇಶ 'ಸಜ-ೆ ಾಯ-ಕPಮ ೆa 'ಜಯಪರ ನಗರ Uಾಸಕಾದ ಬಸನJೌಡ RಾLೕಲ ಯDಾSಳ ರವರು ಮುWೋಳ ನಗರದ ಜನDಾ Rಾ@• ಾPJೆ ಬಂದು ಗೇಶ ಮೂG-Jೆ
ಾfಾಪ-ೆ
ಾh ನಂತರ ^ರವyJೆಯ@ (ಾಗವC;ದEರು. ನಂತರ 20.20 ಗಂdೆJೆ ಮುWೋಳ ನಗರದ O=ಾ! ಸಕ-ಲದ@ ಾವ-ಜ%ಕ=ಾe ಬಸನJೌಡ RಾLೕಲ (ಯDಾSಳ) ರವರು ಈ ೆಳeನಂDೆ
ಾತಾhದುE ಇರುತ"ೆ ಾವ (ಾರತದ@"ೆE=ೆbೕ Rಾ4ಾನದ@"ೆE=ೆbೕ? ಎಂಬ Jೊಂದ@"ೆEೕ=ೆ. ಾವ ಮುWೋಳ ಅಥ=ಾ fಾFೋರದ@"ೆEೕ=ೆŽೕ? ಎಂಬುದನುS J¸ï ¥ÀE CªÀgÀ£ÀÄß PÉüÀ¨ÉÃQzÉ. £Á£ÀÄ JAJ¯ïJ ಇ"ಾEಗ 'ಜಯಪರದ ಎ. ನನS ಬJೆq ಸುಳl} ಆೋಪ
ಾhದE. ಆಗ ಾನು ಅವ%Jೆ %ನJೆ ಏಾದೂP DಾಕGದEೆ &ಾ4 •ƒಟುu ಾಜ4ೕಯ ೆa 0ಾ ಎಂದು DºÁé£À ¤ÃrzÉ. ªÀÄÄAzÉ CªÀgÀ ¸ÀA§A¢üPÀjAzÀ gÁf ¸ÀAzsÁ£À ªÀiÁr¹zÀ. PÁAUÉæ¸ï ¸ÀPÁðgÀ C¢üPÁjUÀ¼À£ÀÄß 0ೇ ಾ Lu ಬಳ ೆ
ಾh ೊಂಡು ಾZಾ ;ಂ• ಅವರನುS ಮೂರು Gಂಗಳl %tೇŒ;"ಾEೆ. ಅವರು ಒಬ_ ಎಂ.ಎ2.ಎ ಅದರ ಅ7'ಲ@"ೇ ಎ ರವೆ ಾಜ;ಂ• ಬರುವದನುS ತBೆದು %tೇŒ; ಾಜ ಾರಣ
ಾಡುG"ಾEೆ. %ೕ=ೇನು ಾಜ4ೕಯ
ಾಡಲು ಕುiG9Eೕಾ. - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 ಲXಾಂತರ CಂದೂಗಳನುS ೊfೆ
ಾh Lಪg ಒಬ_ ಹಾಮ ೋರ ಸೂ>ೆಮಗ, ಔರಂಗZೇˆ ಒಬ_ ಹಾಮ ೋರ ಸೂ>ೆಮಗ Cಂದೂ 'ೋŒ. ಈ ಬJೆq
ಾತಾhದೆ ನನS ^ೕfೆ ೇ FಾಕುGೕ7, ಾನು ಅದ ೆa Fೆದರುವ9ಲ@ ಅಂತಹ %tೇಧ ಕPಮವನುS ಾನು ಖಂhಸುDೇೆ. ಾವ Cಂದೂಗಳl ೆಂಡರfಾ@. ನಮ] ಮಂ9 ಅ4aJೆ, Jಾ;Jೆ 0ೆನS ಹG"ಾEೆ. ಮತ"ಾರರು ಅ4a Jಾನಂತಹ JಾರಂL bೕಜೆJೆ 0ೆನSಹG ಮತವನುS ಅವ7Jೆ Fಾಕುವದ7ಂದ ನಮJೆ Dೊಂದೆಯುಂdಾಗುತ"ೆ. ಮುಂ9ನ 9ನದ@ Cಂದೂಪರ ಜನಪPG%ŒಗiJೆ ಮತ %ೕಡ0ೇಕು. ಗೇಶ ಉತ+ವದ@ hZೆ ಹಚƒ0ಾರದು ಎಂದು ಅŒ ಾ7ಗಳl ಆ"ೇಶ
ಾಡುDಾೆ. ಾ=ೇನು Rಾ4ಾನದ@"ೆEೕ=ೆŽೕ? ಎಂಬುದು ನಮJೆ JೊಂದಲವಂdಾಗುG"ೆ. ಮುಂ9ನ ಮುಖಮಂGP ಾೇ ಆಗುDೇೆ. ಆಗ ಇ"ೇ ಎ. ರವರನುS ಾZಾ;ಂ•ರನುS ಕೆತರಲು Fೈದಾ0ಾ{ Jೆ ಕಳlC; ಅವ7Jೆ ರ•ೆ %ೕಡಲು ೇಮಕ
ಾಡುDೇೆ. ಜHೕರ ಅಹ]ದರವೆ JಾಂŒ, ೆಹರು ರವರು CಂದೂಗiJೆ
ಾhದ ಅಾಹುತ ಅಂದೆ Rಾ4ಾನ 0ೇೆ "ೇಶ ಅಂDಾ ಬೆದು ೊLuದುE Fಾಗೂ "ೇಶದ@ 13 ಲ• ಎಕೆ ವˆಬ ಆ;
ಾhದುE, ನಮ] ಾಜದ@ 1 ಲ• 11 ಾ'ರ ಎಕೆ ಜHೕನು ಇರುತ"ೆ. ಮುಂ9ನ 9ನಗಳ@ ಈ ಾನೂನು DೆJೆದುFಾ4 ದತರು ಮತು Cಂದುiದ ವಗ-ದವ7Jೆ 50 ಾ'ರ ಏಕೆ ಭೂH ಹಂಚುDೇೆ. ;ದEಾಮಯJೆ ಧಮ] ಇ"ೆP. %ೕವ ದತ7Jೆ ಮತು Cಂದುiದ ವಗ-ದವ7Jೆ ಭೂH ಹಂಚುGಾ, ;ದEಾಮಯ ನವ7 ನವ7Jೆ Cಂದೂಗಳ ಗಳ ಮತ 0ೇ ಾeಲ@. JಾಂŒ ಮತು ೆಹರು
ಾhದ ಎಡವLu%ಂದ Rಾ4ಾನ ಟುu ೊಟುu ವಬ_ %H-; ಅವ7Jೆ ಲXಾಂತರ ಎಕೆ ಆ; ಟುu ೊಟuರು. ಾನು ;.ಎಂ ಮತು ೇಂದPದ@ ನೇಂದP /ೕ9 .ಎಂ ಆ"ೆP ಮತು 400 ಾನಗಳl ಬಂದ@ ವಬ_ ಾŽEಯನುS 4ತು FಾಕುDೇ=ೆ. O=ಾ! ಮFಾಾಜರು ಇರ9ದEೆ "ಅಗರ O=ಾ!-ಾ FೊDಾDೊ ಾ; ಾ0ಾ ಮದುಾ ಮ;ೕ9" ಅಂDಾ ಆಗುGತು, ನನS Fೆಸರು ಬಸನJೌಡ ಇದEದುE ಬ;ೕರಾಬ ಆeರGತು. ಇನೂS ಬ"ಾಸಾಬ ಹಲ@ಟಾಬ ಇರುGದEವ. ಆದೆ O=ಾ! ಾಜ7ಂದ ಇವ ಏನು ಆಗಲ@, ಮು;@ಮರು ಸ
ಾಜ 'ೋŒಗಳl. (ಾರತದ@ ಶ7sಾ ಾನೂನು Zಾ7Jೊiಸಲು ನಮ] ಸಂ'WಾನವನುS 'ೋŒಸುDಾೆ. (ಾರತದ@ Cಂದೂಗಳ ಸ ಾ-ರವನ ಒg ೊಳl}ವ9ಲ@ ಎಂದು ಅಂ0ೇಡa• ಅವರು ತಮ] ಸಂ'Wಾನದ@ ಉfೆ@ೕ‘;"ಾEೆ. ಒಬ_ H%ಸu• ನನJೆ ಾ[Jೆ Fೋ ೆ
ಾಡುDಾೆ. ಾನೂ ಒಬ_ ಸಾತನ Cಂದೂ ಧಮ-ದ %ಯG ಾ[, ಾನು (ಾರತದ ಾ[, ಾನು (ಾರತ - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 ಸಂ'Wಾನದ ಾ[, ಾನು ನೇಂದP /ೕ9ಯ ಾ[, ಾನ sಾವ ಮಕaಳ ZೊDೆ ಅಡ$ಸu^ಂ• ಇರfಾರ"ೇ Zೆ ಾ[, %ೕವ ಹಂ9 ZೊDೆ ಕೂh ಹಾH Fೇಲ GಂG 0ಾ0ಾ ಾFೇಬರನುS ೋ; ಅವ7Jೆ ಅವ
ಾನ
ಾhದುE ಾಂJೆP ನವರು. sಾದe7ಯ@ ದತ ಎಐJೆ ಅ@ನ ಎಂಎ2ಎ 12 ಲ• ರೂ ಲಂಚ ೆa 0ೇh ೆ ಇLuದEರು. ಮುಂ"ೆ 1 ಲ• FೇiದE ೆa ಆ ಮನುಷ%Jೆ %Jೆ ಟುu 0ೇೆ sಾವ"ೋ .ಎ.ಐ 18 ಲ• ೊಟುu ಅವ%Jೆ DೊJೊಂಡ ಬಂ9P, ಆ ಇದ7ಂದ
ಾನ;ಕ ‘ನSDೆJೊಳJಾe ಎಐ ಆತ]ಹDೆ
ಾh ೊಂಡರು. ಈಗ ಾ ೇಳG%, ದತ ಮುಖಂಡ ಎ@"ಾEೆ? ಒಬ_ h.ಎ. /ೆS ನನJೆ Fೇiದ ನನJೆ 50 ಲ• ರೂ ೊdೆu, 6 GಂಗiJೆ ಎ _; ಟುP ಅಂತ Fೇiದರು. ಾನು ಅವ%Jೆ ಅಂ"ೆ 50 ಲ•ಕೂa ’ಾರ 6 ಮಂತJೆ ಆನಂದಕು
ಾರ ಅಂDಾ ಎ. ಇದ 'ಜಯಪYರ ೆa, 0ಾಗಲ ೋdೆ ಎ. %ೕವ ೕK
ಾh ೇi, %ಮಗ ಈ "ೇಶದ ಜಾ dಾಕ+9ಂದ %ಮ ಪJಾರ ೊಡDಾರ. G
ಾ]ಪYರ ರವರ ಮೆ[ಂದ ಅಲ@. ವJಾ-ವೆJಾe ೕ 7Jೆ ®AZÀ 0ೇh ೆ[ಡುG"ಾEೆ ಇದು ಸ7ಯಲ@. ಅŒ ಾರ Uಾಶ<ತವಲ@, ಆರು Gಂಗಳ@ %ಮ] ಸ ಾ-ರ=ೇ ಇರುವ9ಲ@. Fೈ ೋಟ-9ಂದ ಮೂರು Gಂಗ>ೆ“ಳJೆ ಅನುಮG ಪBೆದು ೊಂಡು ಬಂದು 0ಾಗಲ ೋdೆಯ ಎ Dಾಲೂ4ನ@ ಾZಾ;ಂ•ರನುS ಕೆ[; ಎಲ@ ಕBೆJೆ Cಂದೂಪರ (ಾಷಣ
ಾಡುDೇ=ೆ. LಪgಸುfಾK ಮ ಔರಂಗZೇˆJೆ 0ೈಯುDೇ=ೆ. ಅŒ ಾ7ಗiJೆ 0ೇೆ 7ೕGಯ@Žೕ Rಾಠ ಕಸುDೇೆ. ಆ 0ೇವ;- ನನS ಮಗ ಓ=ೈ; ಹಾಮ ೋರ ಇಲಕಲ@ Fಾಗೂ ಜಮಖಂhJೆ ಬಂ"ೆP ೕಸರು ಏನು
ಾಡಲ@. ಇ9ೕಗ ಾZಾ;ಂಗರ ¤§AðzsÀ 'Œ;ರುವ %ಮJೆ Fೈ ೋಟ-%ಂದ ತಕa Rಾಠ ಕ; 0ಾಗಲ ೋdೆ ತುಂಬ (ಾಷಣ
ಾಡುDೇ ಾಗಮಂಗಲದ@ RೆdೊPೕ2 0ಾಂˆ ಮತು ಕಲು@ ತೂಾಟ
ಾBಾರ, ಒಬ_ ಎ. ಗೇಶ ಮೂG-ಯ ೕ =ಾಹನದ@ ೊಂBೊಯುDಾೆ, %ಮJೆ ಾ• ೆsಾಗ0ೇಕು. "ೇಶದ ಅನS Gಂದು ನಮ] ಾನೂ Jೌರ'ಸುವ ಪPGbಂದು ಮು;@ಂನನುS ಾನು Jೌರ'ಸುDೇೆ. ಮೆJೆ "ೊPೕಹ ಬJೆಯುವ ಮು;@ಂ7Jೆ ತಕa ಕಸುDೇ=ೆ. RಾfೆೈK ಧkಜ Ch"ೆP ಏನು ತRಾg[ತು ಅಂDಾ FೇಳDಾನ ಜHೕರಅಷದ ಾವ ಇೆPೕ2 ಧkಜ C Fಾಂಗ ಆಗುತ"ೆ. !fಾ@Œ ಾ7 Zಾನ4ಾಮ ಅಂDಾ Fೆಸರು ಇದುE,
ಾಡುವ"ೆಲ@ Cಂದೂ 'ೋŒ, ಮುWೋಳದ ಏನ ಾZಾ;ಂ•Jೆ ಅಪ
ಾನ
ಾh9E7. ಇದನುS ಾವ ಡುವ9ಲ@ ೇಡು Gೕ7; ೊಳl}Dೇ=ೆ. ಾನು ;ಎಂ ಆ ಒಂ"ೆ ಒಂದು ರೂ ಲಂಚ ಪBೆಯ"ೇ ಎಲ@ ೕ ಹು"ೆEಗಳನುS ಭG-
ಾಡುDೇೆ. "ೇಶದ ಭದPDೆJಾe - 20 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 ೕ ಇfಾ&ೆಯನುS ಭದPDೆJೊiಸಲು ಒತು %ೕಡ0ೇಕು. ಇ"ೇ 7ೕG Cಂದೂಗಳl %-ಪ=ಾeದEೆ ಮುಂ9ನ 9ನಃ Cಂದೂಗಳl !ೕವನ ನBೆಸುವದು ಕ•ಣ=ಾಗುತ"ೆ. ಅಪg ಮಕaಳl ದುಡು$
ా ಮುಖಮಂGPsಾಗಲು ಹವy;ದೆ ಜನಬಲ9ಂದ ಮುಖಮಂGPsಾಗುವದು %Oƒತ. "ೇಶ ೆa JಾಂŒ ಒಬ_7ಂದfೇ ಾ<ತಂತP– ;4aಲ@, FೊರDಾe ೇDಾ! ಸು(ಾ ಚಂದP 0ೋ ಅವರ ಭಯ9ಂದ "ೇಶ ೆa ಾ<ತಂತP– "ೊೆ4"ೆ ಎಂದು 0ಾ0ಾ ಾFೇˆ ಅಂ0ೇಡa• ರವ Fೇi"ಾEೆ. Rಾ4ಾನದ@ ಪP=ಾಹ ಉಂdಾದೆ 10 ೋL ರೂ. ಪ7Fಾರ %Œ ೊಡುDಾೆ. ಅHೕ• ಖ ನಂತವರು. "ೇಶದ@ ಅತಂತP ಭಯ ಾಡುG"ೆ ಎಂಬ Fೇi ೆ %ೕಡುDಾೆ. Rಾ4ಾನ ಮತು (ಾರತ 'ಭ! ಪಸಕ'"ೆ. ಆ ಪಸಕವನುS ಎ. ರವೇ ಾGP ತ7; ೊಂಡು ಓ9P, ಈ ಪಸಕ /ೕ9 ಬೆ9ಲ@. ! .ಆ•.ಅಂ0ೇಡaರ ರವರು ಬೆ9ರುDಾೆ. ಇದ7ಂದ (ಾರತದ@ ಶ7sಾ ಾನೂನು ತಂದು, ಾ ಬ ಸಂ'WಾನವನುS DೆJೆದು ಡುDಾೆ ಅಂDಾ ಅಂ0ೇಡaರ ರವ7Jೆ 'ಭಜೆ[ಂ"ಾಗುವ ಪ7ಾಮಗಳ ಬJೆq ಆಗ JೊGತು. ಾZಾ ;ಂ• ಅವರನುS %tೇŒ;ದE ೆa ನನJೆ ಬಹಳ ೋ=ಾe"ೆ. ಓ=ೈ;ಯನುS ಟುu ಾZಾ;ಂ• ರ %tೇŒಸುGೕ7. ನನJೆ (ಾಷಣ
ಾh ಎಂದು ಸಲFೆ %ೕಡುGೕ7. ಾನು ಜನಪPG%Œ ಇ"ೆEೕೆ. ನನJೆ Fೇ>ೆ“ೕ ಅŒ ಾರ %ಮeಲ@, ೇವಲ ರ•ೆ %ೕಡುವ ೆಲಸ
ಾh ೕಸೆ. /ೕ9 ಆಡiತದ@ ೈ%ಕ7Jೆ Fೆ•ƒನ ಾ<ತ %ೕhದ ಪ7ಾಮ "ೇಶದ ಭದPDೆ Fೆ‚ಾƒe"ೆ ಎೆಡೂರು ವಷ-ಗಳ@ ಾವ ಅŒ ಾರ ೆa ಬರುDೇ=ೆ. ಆಗ Cಂದೂ ಅŒ ಾ7ಗiJೆ Fೆ•ƒನ ೌಲಭ %ೕಡುDೇ=ೆ. 0ಾಂJಾ@
ಾದ7ಯ@ ನಮ] ಎಂ ರವರ ಮೆJೆ Fೋe' ಅಂತ %ಮ] ಅಪgJೆ ಹುLu"ೆP ನಮ] ಇಂhಯK H2— ಮತು ೕಸಳನುS ಸ7; Fೋe7 ೋBೋಣ. ಮುಂ ಮುಖಮಂGPsಾಗುವ ವ4bಬ_ನ ಬJೆq ಬJೆq ; ಐ ಸಳ Fಾಗೂ fೋ ಾಯುಕದ@ ೇ Fಾ4"ೆEೕೆ. ಅದನುS ಎದು7P ¸ÀĦæFA PÉÆÃmïð£À°è 17 ªÀQîgÀ£ÀÄß §ÄPï ªÀiÁrPÉÆArzÁÝgÉ ªÀRá PÀAiÉÄÝ GದುEಪh
ಾಡDಾ ಇ9E', Cಂದ ಧಮ-ದ ಎರಡು ಎಂ ಇರುDಾೆ ಅಂDಾ
ಾತಾh 21:30 ಗಂdೆವೆJೆ (ಾಷಣ
ಾh ಮುe;ರುDಾೆ. ಆ ಾಲ ೆa 6000-7000 ಜನರು ೇ7ದEರು. ಮತು ೕ ಇfಾ&ೆಯ ಅŒ ಾ7 Fಾಗೂ ;ಬ_ಂ9ಯವರು ಬಂ"ೋ ಬ; ಕತ-ವದ@ ಇದEರು. ಈ (ಾಷಣದ ಾಾಂಶವನುS ೋಡfಾe ಇದರ@ 'ಜಯಪರ ನಗರ Uಾಸಕಾದ ಬಸನJೌಡ RಾLೕಲ ಯDಾSಳ ರವರು Dಾವ ಒಬ_ ಜನಪPG%Œ ಇದEರೂ ಸಹ ಅನ ಮGೕಯ ಅಥ=ಾ ಗುಂನ ಜನರನುS 0ೈ"ಾhದೆ ಾ
ಾ!ಕ - 21 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 ಾಮರಸ ೆa ದ ೆaಯುಂdಾಗುತ"ೆ ಅಂDಾ JೊGದEರೂ ಸಹ Lಪg ಒಬ_ ಹಾಮ ೋರ ೊ>ೆಮಗ, ಔರಂಗZೇˆ ಒಬ_ ಹಾಮ ೋರ ಸೂ>ೆ ಮಗ, ಅವರು Cಂದೂ 'ೋŒಗಳl ಅಂDಾ 0ೈ"ಾh ಅವರು ''ಧ ಮGೕಯ ಜನರ ಮಧ "ೆ<ೕಷವನುSಂಟು
ಾಡುವ ಉ"ೆEೕಶ9ಂದ Fಾಗೂ ''ಧ ವಗ-ಗಳ ನಡು=ೆ "ೆ<ೕಷ =ೈಮಸು+ ಉಂಟು
ಾಡುವ ಮತು =ೈಮನಸ+ದ (ಾವೆಗಳನುS 0ೆ>ೆಸುವ ಉ"ೆEೕಶ9ಂದ Fಾಗೂ ತಮ] (ಾಷಣ9ಂದ ''ಧ ೋಮು, ZಾGಯ ಸಮು"ಾಯಗಳ ನಡು=ೆ ಅೌFಾಧ-Dೆ ಅಥ=ಾ "ೆ<ೕಷ (ಾವೆಯನುSಂಟು
ಾಡಲು ಉDೇ!ಸುವ ಮGೕಯ "ೆ<ೕಷದ (ಾಷಣ
ಾhದುE ಈ ಬJೆq ಸದ7ಯವರ ^ೕfೆ ನನSದು ಸ.ತ ‰sಾ-9 ಇದುE ‰sಾ-9 ಇದುE. ಮುಂ9ನ ಾನೂನು 7ೕG ಕPಮ ೈ ೊಳ}ಲು 'ನಂG ಅ"ೆ. ಈ ಬJೆq ಾನು ^ೕfಾŒ ಾ7ಗiJೆ '‚ಾ7; ‰sಾ-9 ೊಡಲು ತಡ=ಾeರುತ"ೆ." 8. The offence alleged against the petitioner apart from Section 505(2) of the IPC is the one punishable under Section 153A. Interpretation of Section 153A to become an offence or the presence of ingredients to become an offence need not detain this Court for longer or delve deep into the matter. 9. The Apex Court in the case of JAVED AHMAD HAJAM v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA1 interpreting Section 153A of the IPC has held as follows: “….. …. …. 10. Now, coming back to Section 153-A, clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 153-AIPC is attracted when by words, either spoken or 1 (2024) 4 SCC 156 - 22 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 written or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, an attempt is made to promote disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities. The promotion of disharmony, enmity, hatred or ill will must be on the grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste, community or any other analogous grounds. Clause (b) of sub- section (1) of Section 153-AIPC will apply only when an act is committed which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity. 11. Now, coming to the words used by the appellant on his WhatsApp status, we may note here that the first statement is that August 5 is a Black Day for Jammu and Kashmir. 5-8-2019 is the day on which Article 370 of the Constitution of India was abrogated, and two separate Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir were formed. Further, the appellant has posted that “Article 370 was abrogated, we are not happy”. On a plain reading, the appellant intended to criticise the action of the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India. He has expressed unhappiness over the said act of abrogation. The aforesaid words do not refer to any religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community. It is a simple protest by the appellant against the decision to abrogate Article 370 of the Constitution of India and the further steps taken based on that decision. The Constitution of India, under Article 19(1)(a), guarantees freedom of speech and expression. Under the said guarantee, every citizen has the right to offer criticism of the action of abrogation of Article 370 or, for that matter, every decision of the State. He has the right to say he is unhappy with any decision of the State. 12. In Manzar Sayeed Khan [Manzar Sayeed Khan v. State of Maharashtra, (2007) 5 SCC 1 : (2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 417] , this Court has read “intention” as an essential ingredient of the said offence. The alleged objectionable words or expressions used by the - 23 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 appellant, on its plain reading, cannot promote disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities. The WhatsApp status of the appellant has a photograph of two barbed wires, below which it is mentioned that “AUGUST 5 — BLACK DAY — JAMMU&KASHMIR”. This is an expression of his individual view and his reaction to the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India. It does not reflect any intention to do something which is prohibited under Section 153-A. At best, it is a protest, which is a part of his freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a). 13. Every citizen of India has a right to be critical of the action of abrogation of Article 370 and the change of status of Jammu and Kashmir. Describing the day the abrogation happened as a “Black Day” is an expression of protest and anguish. If every criticism or protest of the actions of the State is to be held as an offence under Section 153-A, democracy, which is an essential feature of the Constitution of India, will not survive. 14. The right to dissent in a legitimate and lawful manner is an integral part of the rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a). Every individual must respect the right of others to dissent. An opportunity to peacefully protest against the decisions of the Government is an essential part of democracy. The right to dissent in a lawful manner must be treated as a part of the right to lead a dignified and meaningful life guaranteed by Article 21. But the protest or dissent must be within four corners of the modes permissible in a democratic set up. It is subject to reasonable restrictions imposed in accordance with clause (2) of Article 19. In the present case, the appellant has not at all crossed the line. 15. The High Court has held [Javed Ahmed Hajam v. State of Maharashtra, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 819] that the possibility of stirring up the emotions of a group of people cannot be ruled out. The appellant's - 24 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 college teachers, students, and parents were allegedly members of the WhatsApp group. As held by Vivian Bose, J., the effect of the words used by the appellant on his WhatsApp status will have to be judged from the standards of reasonable women and men. We cannot apply the standards of people with weak and vacillating minds. Our country has been a democratic republic for more than 75 years. The people of our country know the importance of democratic values. Therefore, it is not possible to conclude that the words will promote disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious groups. The test to be applied is not the effect of the words on some individuals with weak minds or who see a danger in every hostile point of view. The test is of the general impact of the utterances on reasonable people who are significant in numbers. Merely because a few individuals may develop hatred or ill will, it will not be sufficient to attract clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 153- AIPC. 16. As regards the picture containing “Chand” and below that the words “14th August-Happy Independence Day Pakistan”, we are of the view that it will not attract clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 153-AIPC. Every citizen has the right to extend good wishes to the citizens of the other countries on their respective Independence Days. If a citizen of India extends good wishes to the citizens of Pakistan on 14th August, which is their Independence Day, there is nothing wrong with it. It is a gesture of goodwill. In such a case, it cannot be said that such acts will tend to create disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious groups. Motives cannot be attributed to the appellant only because he belongs to a particular religion. 17. Now, the time has come to enlighten and educate our police machinery on the concept of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and the extent of reasonable restraint on their free speech and expression. They must be sensitised about the democratic values enshrined in our Constitution. - 25 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30519 CRL.P No. 12806 of 2024 18. For the same reasons, clause (b) of sub- section (1) of Section 153-AIPC will not be attracted as what is depicted on the WhatsApp status of the appellant cannot be said to be prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony among various groups as stated therein. Thus, continuation of the prosecution of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 153-AIPC will be a gross abuse of the process of law.” (Emphasis supplied) 10. In the light of the issue standing answered by the judgment of the Apex Court as afore-quoted and that of this Court in the afore-extracted judgment, the petition deserves to succeed. 11. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) Proceedings pending in Crime No.264/2024 stand quashed qua the petitioner. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 0