Allahabad HC declines to quash FIR against RJD leader for tearing Manusmriti on live TV
text_fieldsThe Allahabad High Court has refused to quash the FIR against Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) spokesperson Priyanka Bharti for allegedly tearing pages of the Manusmriti during a live television debate.
The court described the act as a reflection of "malicious and deliberate intention" and deemed it a cognizable offense.
In its ruling on February 28, a bench comprising Justices Vivek Kumar Birla and Anish Kumar Gupta observed that tearing the Manusmriti - a Hindu scripture attributed to the sage Manu - during a live debate amounted to a deliberate act with no lawful justification. The court noted that the Manusmriti is regarded as a “holy book” and that its desecration in a public forum could offend religious sentiments.
“The act of tearing a holy book of a particular religion during a live TV debate, broadcast on India TV and TV9 Bharatvarsh, clearly reflects a malicious and deliberate intention,” the bench stated. It further held that such an act, done without lawful excuse, prima facie constituted a cognizable offense under Section 299 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which pertains to deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious sentiments.
Bharti, a PhD student at Jawaharlal Nehru University, had petitioned the court to dismiss the FIR, arguing that she did not intend to insult religious sentiments. She claimed that her actions occurred spontaneously during the debate when certain questions were posed to her. She also asserted that the incident did not disrupt public order.
In rejecting Bharti’s plea, the High Court referred to a Supreme Court ruling in a case involving journalist Amish Devgan, who faced multiple FIRs over an alleged hate speech during a live broadcast. The apex court had upheld the FIRs, emphasizing that individuals in positions of influence, including politicians and media figures, have a greater responsibility due to their public reach.
The High Court echoed this view, stating that influential figures must exercise caution in their words and actions, as their statements carry significant impact. The bench further noted that Bharti, as a highly educated individual and a political spokesperson, could not claim ignorance regarding the consequences of her actions.