Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

A Special NIA Court of Bangalore has convicted a man for celebrating the death of 40 CRPF soldiers who died during the Pulwama Attack. The man has been sentenced to five years of imprisonment by the special court for commenting on a Facebook post.

The said Facebook comment by the person was posted supporting the acts committed by the terrorists with an intention to disrupt the sovereignty and integrity of India and to promote enmity between different groups on the ground of religion. 

The person had commented on 24 different posts celebrating the death of the CRPF soldiers in the Pulwama Attack. The posts on which comments were made include posts by Times of India, India Times, News18, Being India, Hindustan Times, India Tv, etc.

Subsequently, a case was registered against the person under sections 153- A (Promoting enmity between different groups), 124-A (Sedition) and 201 (Causing disappearance of evidence of offense) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 (Punishment for Unlawful Activities) of Unlawful Activities Prevention Act.

The Special court did not conduct the trial for the offense under Section 124-A IPC following the judgment of the Supreme Court, S.G. Vombatkere vs. Union of India wherein the operation of Section 124-A was stayed and kept in abeyance.

The counsel for the accused argued that the investigation officer has not conducted the investigation regarding ownership of the mobile seized in this case and the prosecution has not produced any evidence to connect the accused. He also argued that that there must be two groups to attract the ingredients of the offense under section 153A of IPC and that the witnesses have admitted that the accused has not commented against any religion. Further, it was also submitted that the prosecution has not proved that the accused was disaffected against India and failed to prove the charges leveled against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

While deciding the order of sentence the counsel for the accused prayed for leniency and submitted before the court that the accused has aged parents and there is nobody to take care of them. Further, it was submitted that he is the only earning member in his family and he was a good student and he intends to continue his education. The counsel also submitted that the accused has been in jail for more than three and half years, he has realized his mistakes and will mend his behavior in the future.

The counsel for the accused also prayed for the release of the accused on probation for good conduct arguing that the offense punishable under Section 153-A, Section 201 IPC, and Section 13 of UAPA is less than seven years and the accused was below the age of 21 years while committing the offense.

The Special Public Prosecutor argued that the said offenses are against the nation and sections 3 and 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act and Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are not applicable to the present case.

The Court while refusing to release the person under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Probation of Offenders Act noted that –

“In the said incident, more than 40 Jawans sacrificed their lives for the nation. Due to the said incident, the whole nation was immersed in an ocean of sorrow. In this situation, the accused celebrated the death of more than 40 Indian Jawans who sacrificed their lives to protect the lives of the citizens of this country and to protect this great nation which has given every citizen of this county including the accused the fundamental rights such as right to equality, freedom of speech and expression, right to life and personal liberty, right against exploitation, right to freedom of religion, cultural and educational rights and constitutional remedies in case of any violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under part-III of the constitution”

The court also took note of the repeated comments made by the accused on different posts on news channels and the accused being happy about the killing of the soldiers. The court said that

“The accused has not made derogatory comments one or two times. He made the comments to all the posts made by all the news channels on facebook. Moreover, he was not an illiterate or ordinary man. He was a engineering student at the time of commission of the offence and he made the posts and comments intentionally on his facebook account. He felt happy about killing of the great souls and celebrated the death of the great souls as he was not an Indian. Therefore, the offence committed by the accused is against this great nation and heinous in nature”

The Court convicted the accused under section 153-A, 201 of IPC and Section 13 of the UAPA and sentenced him to five years of simple imprisonment. The court also imposed a total fine of Rs. 25000 on the accused

Case Title: The State of Karnataka vs Sri Faiz Rashid