MP High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Bhajan Host Accused Of Disrespecting Lord Ram, Goddess Sita

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on July 16 granted anticipatory bail to the host of a devotional music programme who was booked after allegedly making disrespectful remarks about Lord Ram and Goddess Sita during a stage performance.

The Court observed that the material on record did not prima facie show any intention to hurt religious sentiments or create communal disharmony.

Justice Devnarayan Mishra was dealing with an anticipatory bail plea filed in connection with an FIR lodged under Sections 353(2) and 353(3) BNS.

According to the applicant, a devotional programme organised by U.S. Agro Seeds Company featured bhajan singer Shahnaz Akhtar, while he was anchoring the event.

During an interval, he narrated a doha relating to discussions among the women of Lanka following the abduction of Goddess Sita. The prosecution alleged that, while doing so, he used disrespectful words against Lord Ram and Goddess Sita and played a related video on his tablet.

The accused contended that the applicant was merely narrating a passage from the Ramcharitmanas depicting the fear among the residents of Lanka after the abduction of Goddess Sita.

It was submitted that while it was alleged that the applicant said ‘सीता नाश कराएगी’, in reality, he was narrating the conversation of frightened residents of Lanka.

It was further submitted that when objections were raised, the applicant immediately apologised publicly, and a video recording showed him seeking pardon for his words.

The applicant also argued that the ingredients of Section 353(2) BNS were not attracted and relied upon the Supreme Court's decisions in Amish Devgan v. Union of India and Imran Pratapgarhi v. State of Gujarat.

It was contended that restrictions on free speech must be assessed from the standpoint of a reasonable person and that artistic or literary expression cannot be lightly criminalised.

Opposing the plea, the State argued that the allegations were serious and that granting anticipatory bail would send a wrong message to society by encouraging irresponsible statements capable of hurting the sentiments of the majority community.

After considering the submissions of both the parties, the High Court noted that the alleged offence carries a maximum punishment of three years' imprisonment. It further observed that prosecution under Section 196 BNS (https://devgan.in/bns/section/196/) requires prior permission from the competent government authority.

Examining the video, the Court found that the applicant was narrating a conversation among the women of Lanka expressing fear that the abduction of Goddess Sita would bring destruction upon Lanka.

The Court observed that while the applicant's "word selection may not be proper," it could not, at this stage, be concluded that he intended to hurt public sentiments or create "mischief, riot, affray or disharmony among the people on the basis of religion."

In view of these observations, the Court granted him anticipatory bail while directing that in the event of arrest, the applicant be released on furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one solvent surety of the like amount.

Case Title: SANDEEP KUMAR v THE STATE OF MP

Bench: Justice Devnarayan Mishra