Calling someone Miyan-Tiyan or Pakistani does not amount to hurting religious sentiments: Supreme Court

Calling someone 'Miyan-Tiyan" or "Pakistani" may be in poor taste but does not amount to the offence of hurting religious sentiments under Section 298 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Supreme Court recently ruled [Hari Nandan Singh vs State of Rajasthan]..The Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma made the observation while closing a case against a man accused of calling a government servant 'Pakistani' while the former was discharging his official duties. "Undoubtedly, the statements made are poor taste. However, it does not amount to hurting the religious sentiments of the informant. Hence, we are of the opinion that the appellant shall also be discharged under Section 298 IPC," the Court said in its judgment of February 11. .The complainant in the case was an Urdu translator and acting clerk (Right to Information). The accused, one Hari Nandan Singh, had sought some information under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act) from the additional collector and the said information was dispatched to him.Not satisfied, Singh filed an appeal allegedly after manipulating the documents already sent to him.Nevertheless, in the appellate proceedings, the appellate authority directed the complainant to personally serve the information to Singh.For the said purpose, the complainant visited the accused's residence to hand over the information. Singh initially refused to accept the documents but, upon insistence by the complainant, eventually accepted them. However, Singh allegedly abused the complainant by referring to his religion and used criminal force against him while he was discharging his official duties, with the intention of intimidating and deterring him from performing his duties as a public servant.This eventually led to a first information report against Singh for offences under Sections 298 (hurting religious sentiments), 504 (insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), 506 (criminal intimidation), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharging duty), and 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) of IPC. .The statements made are poor taste. However, it does not amount to hurting the religious sentiments.Supreme Court.A chargesheet was filed against the accused and the Magistrate took cognisance of the said offences and summoned Singh.Singh then filed an application for discharge under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). By an order dated March 24, 2022, the Magistrate held that there was sufficient material available on record for framing charges against Singh under Sections 353, 298, and 504 of the IPC. However, the Magistrate further held that there was lack of evidence for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 506 IPC and discharged him of the same.The Sessions Court and the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the challenge to the said order leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.The top court noted that there was no assault or use of force by the appellant to attract Section 353 IPC and that therefore the High Court ought to have discharged the appellant under Section 353 IPC. The court also held that the appellant cannot be charged under Section 504 IPC, as there was no act on his part that could have provoked a breach of peace and accordingly, deserves to be discharged under Section 504 IPC as well. As regards Section 298, the Court said while the said statements were in poor taste, the offence under the said provision will not stand. Hence, the plea was allowed and the accused was discharged of all offences..Senior Advocate A Sirajudeen and advocates Arya Kumari, Divya Singhvi, Pardeep Gupta, Parinav Gupta, Mansi Gupta and Vipin Gupta appeared for the accused.Standing Counsel Vishnu Sharma and advocates Shiv Ram Sharma, Tulika Mukherjee, Venkat Narayan and Beenu Sharma appeared for the State..[Read Judgment]