Calling someone ‘miyan-tiyan’, ‘Pakistani’ not an offence: Supreme Court
Though in poor taste, it does not amount to hurting religious sentiments, says Supreme Court
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has held using terms such as “miyan-tiyan” and “Pakistani” was not an offence of hurting religious sentiments though made in poor taste.
A Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma therefore discharged a man in a criminal case filed by an Urdu translator and acting clerk Right to Information (RTI) in the sub-divisional office, Chas in Jharkhand.
Also Read
The February 11 court order said, “The appellant is accused of hurting the religious feelings of the informant by calling him ‘miyan-tiyan’ and ‘Pakistani’. 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.”
Section 298 of IPC deals with words or gestures made with a deliberate intent to wound religious feelings.
It came on record that accused, Hari Nandan Singh, sought information under the RTI Act from Additional Collector-cum-first appellate authority, Bokaro, and the information was dispatched to him.
However, he filed an appeal before the appellate authority, allegedly after manipulating the documents sent to him by the office through the registered post and making false allegations of manipulation in the documents.
The appellate authority directed the translator to personally serve the information to the appellant.
On November 18, 2020, the informant, accompanied by the messenger of the sub-divisional office, Chas, went to the accused’s home to hand over the information. The accused initially refused to accept the documents but upon insistence by the informant, accepted it.
It was alleged that he abused the informant while referring to his faith and used criminal force against him.
The matter prompted the translator to an FIR registered against the accused. Following an investigation, the trial court ordered framing of charges against the accused also under Sections 353 (assault or criminal force on a public servant) and 504 (intentional insult) of IPC.
The Jharkhand High Court dismissed the accused’s plea for quashing the proceedings.
While hearing the man’s plea against the High Court order, the Bench discharged him of the offence of intentional insult observing “no act on his part that could have provoked a breach of peace” apart from Section 353.
“We set aside the order of the high court which has sustained the order of the trial court and consequently allow the application filed by the appellant and discharge the appellant from all the three offences alleged against him,” it added.
