Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manisha Sharma And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 24 September, 2014
CRM-M No.20543 of 2009 ::1::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Date of decision : September 24, 2014
1. CRM-M No.20543 of 2009
Manisha Sharma and another vs State of Punjab and another
2. CRM-M No.20634 of 2009
Manisha Sharma and another vs State of Punjab and others,
3. CRM-M No.35064 of 2009
State of Punjab vs Narendra Khanna
4. CRM-M No.36757 of 2009
State of Punjab vs Suraj Anand
5. CRM-M No.36768 of 2009
State of Punjab vs Ashu Khurana
6. CRM-M No.36775 of 2009
State of Punjab vs Sunil Chopra
7. CRM-M No.856 of 2010
State of Punjab vs Manisha Sharma
8. CRM-M No.448 of 2011
Pushpa Arora vs State of Punjab and another
9. CRM-M No.14313 of 2012
Yashpal Kaushal & anr vs State of Punjab and another
10. CRM-M No.18490 of 2014
Manisha Sharma vs State of Punjab and another
***
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
***
Present : Mr. MS Khaira, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. D.S Randhawa, Advocate
KISHAN KUMAR
2014.10.31 12:07
for the petitioners.
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
High Court Chandigarh
CRM-M No.20543 of 2009 ::2::
Mr. Sunil Chadha, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate
for the petitioners in CRM-M No.448 of 2011.
Mr. J.S Bedi, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Sunil Sihag, Advocate
for the petitioners in CRM-M No.14313 of 2012.
Ms. Amarjit Kaur Khurana, Addl. A.G Punjab
Mr. CL Pawar, Advocate
for the complainant.
Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate
for respondent No.2 in CRM-M No.18490 of 2014.
***
1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the
judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?
***
Ajay Tewari, J (Oral)
This order shall dispose of CRM-M Nos.20543, 20634, 35064, 36757, 36768, 36775 of 2009, CRM-M No.856 of 2010, CRM-M No.448 of 2011, CRM-M No.14313 of 2012 and 18490 of 2014 in which prayer has been made to quash different FIRs lodged under Sections 153-A, 295-A, 120-B of the IPC, and Section 3(1)(X) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, since the subject matter in all the cases is the same.
The allegations against all the petitioners are that they are Publishers/Principals/Teachers in Schools and they have been accused of publishing, writing and teaching articles deprecatory to Maharishi Balmiki. The common thread running through all the articles is the reference that before he renounced the world, Maharishi Balmiki was a robber. The allusion is to the transcendence which a human being is capable of. In KISHAN KUMARsome cases, the fable of his transformation has been mentioned. It has been 2014.10.31 12:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.20543 of 2009 ::3::
written that he was in the process of robbing a person who told him that even though he was robbing to give sustenance to his family, they would not be a part of his ill deeds. Maharishi Balmiki went to his family and asked whether they would share his sins to which they all replied in the negative and that transformed him.
The question before this Court is whether these sorts of publications offend religious sentiments or are derogatory to Maharishi Balmiki. In one of the petitions, a reference has been made to various other religious treatises including the Guru Granth Sahib where similar references have been made with regard to Maharishi Balmiki mainly as an illustration of the capacity of human beings to transform themselves exponentially. Not only that, in the folklore of this country also these kind of fables of Maharishi Balmiki have a rich resonance and most people of this country might have encountered this story in this precise form, if not in books, then by other media i.e oral and visual. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has itself referred to this inspirational story in not less than five judgments viz Rakesh Kaushik vs. B.L.Vig Superintendent, Central Jail, New Delhi and another, 1980 Supp Supreme Court Cases 183, Maru Ram v. Union of India, AIR 1980 SC 2147, Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1982 SC 1325, and State of Gujarat v. The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, AIR 1998 SC 3164.
In Rakesh Kaushik's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held said:-
"31. We have drawn the broad lines indicative of the direction of correction and leave it at that. The fundamental fact of prison reforms comes from our constitutional recognition that every prisoner is a person KISHAN KUMAR 2014.10.31 12:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.20543 of 2009 ::4::
and personhood holds the human potential which, if unfolded, makes a robber a Valmiki and a sinner a saint."
In Maru Ram's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court said :-
" 85. The question, therefore, is- should the country take the risk of innocent lives being lost at the hands of criminals committing heinous crimes in the holy hope or wishful thinking that one day or the other, a criminal, however, dangerous or callous he may be, will reform himself. Valmikis are not born everyday and to expect that our present generation, with the prevailing social and economic environment, would produce Valmikis day after day is to hope for the impossible."
In Bachan Singh's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court said:-
" 40. It would be convenient first to examine the constitutionality of death penalty with reference to the reformatory end of punishment. The civilised goal of criminal justice is the reformation of the criminal and death penalty means abandonment of this goal for those who suffer it. Obviously death penalty cannot serve the reformatory goal because it extinguishes life and puts an end to any possibility of reformation. In fact, it defeats the reformatory end of punishment. But the answer given by the protagonists of death penalty to this argument is that though there may be a few murderers whom it may be possible to reform and rehabilitate, what about those killers who cannot be reformed and rehabilitated? Why should the death penalty be not awarded to them? But even in their cases, I am afraid, the argument cannot be sustained. There is no way of accurately predicting or knowing with any degree of moral certainty that a murderer will not be reformed or is incapable of reformation. All we know is that there have been many successes even with the most vicious of cases. Was Jean Valjean of Les Miserbles not reformed by the kindness and magnanimity of the Bishop? Was Valmiki a sinner not reformed and did he not become the author of one of the world's greatest epics?.......... "
In State of Gujarat's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court said :-
" 29. It is a grand transformation recorded in the epics that the hunter Valmiki turned out to be a poet of eternal KISHAN KUMAR 2014.10.31 12:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.20543 of 2009 ::5::
recognition. If the powers which brought about that transformation had remained inactive in world would have been poorer without the great epic "Ramayana".
History is replete with instances of bad persons transforming into men of great usefulness to humanity. The causes which would have influenced such swing may be of various kinds. Forces which condemn a prisoner and consign him to the cell as a case of irredeemable character belong to the pessimistic society which lacks the vision to see the innate good in man." To my mind, it is trite that before accusing any person of any such offence, his intention has to be seen; of-course if ironic, sarcastic or tongue-in-cheek remarks are made, they may justifiably be treated as offence/s but if the intention is not to show disrespect, then no such crime can be said to have been committed. I have been taken through the offending passages in all these cases and without exception, my judicial conscience is clear that there is no intention to show any disrespect.
In Jai Ram Sharma v. State of Punjab, 1998 (3) RCR (Criminal) 295, the facts were almost identical and this Court held as follows :-
"8. I myself have the occasion to go through the article and I am unable to come to the conclusion that by introducing this story No.3 in the book, the petitioner ever made deliberate attempt with a malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of any of the individuals who believe in the ideology of Maharishi Balmiki or in the great ideology of Hinduism. To incorporate a commentary aspect of one's life into a book cannot be termed as if one intended to outrage maliciously the religious feelings of a community."
Similarly, in Star India Private Limited vs Union of India, W.P (C) 3823 of 2010 decided on 26.8.2011, the media network had challenged the warning issued to it again on the basis of similar allegations regarding Maharishi Balmiki. The Delhi High Court quashed the warning. KISHAN KUMAR 2014.10.31 12:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh
CRM-M No.20543 of 2009 ::6::
Counsel for the complainant has relied upon M/S Star India Pvt Ltd vs. State of Punjab and another, (CRM-M No.30035 of 2009), decided on 29.4.2010 and Rajan Shahi vs. State of Punjab and another, (CRM-M No.37128 of 2011) decided on 16.7.2013. Both the cases dealt with the similar issue viz reference to Maharishi Balmiki's earlier life. As per the learned counsel, in both these cases this Court refused to quash the FIR by holding that the issue of sustainability of the charge or the evidence would be seen by the trial Court.
It may be mentioned that the decision in Rajan Shahi's case (supra) was passed only on the basis of the the earlier judgment passed in M/S Star India Pvt Ltd's case (supra). In my opinion, the said decision cannot be strictly relevant because it was noticed that the petitioner in that case had earlier also made similar remarks and thereafter tendered an unqualified apology.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioners have relied upon Manzar Sayeed Khan vs State of Maharashtra and another, 2007 (2) RCR (Criminal) 883, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows :-
" 15. Section 153A of IPC, as extracted herein above, 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 tranquility. 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 153A of IPC and the prosecution has to prove prima facie the existence of mens rea on the part of the accused. The KISHAN KUMAR 2014.10.31 12:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.20543 of 2009 ::7::
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 153A 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 there and connect them by a meticulous process of inferential reasoning."
Ultimately, the Hon'ble Supreme Court quashed the FIR. In my opinion, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Manzar Sayeed Khan's case (supra) would be applicable on all fours. Consequently, these petitions are allowed and all the FIRs are quashed.
( AJAY TEWARI )
September 24, 2014 JUDGE
`kk'
KISHAN KUMAR
2014.10.31 12:07
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
High Court Chandigarh