The Uttarakhand High Court recently observed that in a secular country like India, an offence hurting the religious sentiments of a community can not be compounded.
A single bench of Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma stated that if the offence of inciting religious sentiments is easily compounded, it will act as a “parasite” and consume the entire society, resulting in animosity between religious groups.
The bench stated that the basic fabric of the Indian Constitution is “secularism,” which was added in the 42nd Amendment, making India a socialist, secular, and democratic republic.
“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 other’s religious sentiments is permitted to continue, it would rather act as a parasite, which would eat the society itself and create an uncalled for animosity resulting into public disorder and unrest,” Justice Sharma stated.
The bench was hearing a petition filed by one Brajesh, the deputy district secretary of Rashtriya Hindu Vahini, Udham Singh Nagar, who on October 22, 2019, posted a derogatory post about the Muslim community on his WhatsApp Status.
A complaint was filed against him, alleging that the accused’s derogatory remarks and post offended the religious sentiments of the minority community.
In the current petition, the accused stated that he and the complainant reached an amicable settlement and that he also apologized for the offence.
The judge stated in his order that the apology itself indicated guilt in committing the aforementioned offence.
The bench stated that in such cases, courts must consider whether the offences committed have a far-reaching social impact that threatens the country’s basic secular fabric.
If so, the said offence, said cannot be permitted to be compounded, the Court underscored.
“The criminal law of the country is deterrent in nature, in the sense that punishment contemplated in relation to the offences provided under the Indian Penal Code are not basically intended to punish an accused person, but rather to create an example for the others to learn a lesson and not to engage themselves in commission of such type of offences,” the court opined.
The bench dismissed the petition based on these observations.
