'Jihadi', 'Rohingya' not discriminatory against Muslims: Mumbai Police
text_fields
Mumbai: The Mumbai Police on Tuesday told the Bombay High Court that the usage of terms such as “jihadis”, “Rohingyas”, and “Bangladeshis” is not discriminatory against Indian Muslims, Live Law reported.
The Mumbai Police were justifying before the court why they did not prepare a FIR, under IPC 295A, on Bharatiya Janata Party leaders Nitesh Rane, T Raja and Geeta Jain over alleged outraging of religion.
The court was hearing a bunch of pleas seeking action against the saffron party leaders over hate speech against Muslims during public addresses. The alleged incidents amounting to the crime happened in January in Mumbai’s Ghatkopar, Mankhurd, and Malwani areas and Mira-Bhayandar’s Kashimira locality.
Before the bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Shyam Chandak, petitioners highlighted parts of a speech that Rane made in Ghatkopar where he used the words “Rohingyas”, “Bangladeshis”, and “jihadis”, along with other discriminatory expressions.
When the issue of hate speech reached the High Court, it directed police to review videos of the speeches, and it was after that an FIR was registered, that too in March. However, section 295A of IPC was not included.
The police said that Rane’s speech was not targeted at the Muslim community and, therefore, did not fall under the purview of section 295A.
Further, appearing for the three, the public prosecutor Hiten Venegoakar said that Rane’s comments were totally against the Bangladeshi nationals who are staying in India illegally. When the IPC section is for Indians, usage of such terms against non-Indians never turns out to be a crime.
The court disposed of the matter on Tuesday, noting that most of the requests made by the petitioners had been fulfilled.
Hindustan Times quoted the court, “A conscious statement is made by the highest officers of the police departments in Mumbai and Mira-Bhayandar not to invoke section 295A. We accept the statement. Leave is granted to the petitioners to seek for invocation of section 295A at the appropriate stage [framing of charges] before an appropriate forum.”
