Karnataka High Court quashes FIR over Jain University skit insulting Dalits, Dr. Ambedkar

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed the first information report (FIR) against Jain University students and faculty, who were charged under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC/ST Act) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly performing a satirical skit during a university event that was deemed offensive and discriminatory towards the Dalit community and protrayed BR Ambedkar in poor light..Justice SR Krishna Kumar held that the content of the skit was purely satirical and intended for entertainment, which is protected by freedom of speech under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution.He added that the FIR lacked the essential elements required to establish the alleged offenses against the petitioners under SC/ST Act or IPC."There is no material to indicate that the petitioners had any specific intention to insult or intimidate with an intent to humiliate a member of SC/ST community in any place within a public view; so also, the skit / short play performed by the petitioner was in the nature of satire / entertainment, which is constitutionally protected under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression and the impugned FIR clearly does not meet or satisfy the basic ingredients of the offences alleged against the petitioner," the Court said.The controversy arose when students of Jain University's Centre for Management Studies (CMS) performed a short play at the National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro-Sciences (NIMHANS) Convention Centre during the youth festival, which was alleged to be offensive and discriminatory towards the Scheduled Caste communities.According to The News Minute, the skit included a storyline featuring a lower caste man attempting to date a dominant caste woman. The performance contained controversial dialogues including an alteration of Ambedkar’s name to “Beer Ambedkar.” Following the event, a complaint was lodged by one Madhu Sudhana K N, leading to an FIR being registered at Siddapura Police Station under Sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups), 149 (unlawful assembly), and 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings) of the IPC, along with Sections 3(1)(r) (intentionally insulting or intimidating a member of an SC/ST community), 3(1)(s) (abusing a member of an SC/ST community by caste name in public view), and 3(1)(v) (disrespecting any late person held in high esteem by member of SC/ST community) of the SC/ST Act.The FIR was against seven students who took part in the skit and CMS Director Dinesh Nilkant Borker, and Assistant Professor Prateek Thodkar P. Aggrieved by the same, the accused moved the High Court seeking the quashing of the FIR..The Karnataka High Court ruled that skit did not contain any direct insults or humiliating references to any community.The Court added that it was pertinent to mention that the complaint was not filed by a member of the SC/ST community and performance was in the nature of satire and did not have the intent to promote enmity or hatred."A perusal of the alleged complaint and impugned FIR as well as the transcript of the short play / skit enacted during the aforesaid event organized by the aforesaid Institution is sufficient to come to the conclusion that the necessary ingredients constituting the aforesaid offences are conspicuously absent, especially when the said skit / short play was done for mere / sheer entertainment purposes and not with any intention to harm or humiliate any community or race nor make any reference to a particular religion or religious belief," the Court observed.The skit was done for mere entertainment purposes and not with any intention to harm or humiliate any communityKarnataka High Court.Referring to multiple Supreme Court judgments, including Gorige Pentaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand, the Court reiterated that mere mention of caste does not constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act unless it is intended to insult or intimidate in public view..The Court also referred to Indibly Creative (P) Ltd. v. State of West Bengal, where the Supreme Court ruled that art plays a crucial role in questioning social values and popular culture. It emphasized that artists have the right to express their vision freely, including critiquing and challenging existing ideas, as part of their creative freedom..Accordingly, the Court allowed the criminal petitions and quashed the FIR against the petitioners."Under these circumstances, I am of the view that continuation of the impugned proceedings against the petitioners would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference by this Court in the present petition," the Court noted..[Read Order]