The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday quashed a criminal case accusing a textile merchant of outraging religious feelings by selling sarees featuring images of Gautam Buddha on their pallus [Bharatbhai Hirjibhai Shankar vs State Of Gujarat].

Justice PM Raval ruled that one cannot automatically presume that selling textile materials containing artistic depictions of a deity is an act driven by deliberate malice.

"Mere printing or selling of textile materials containing artistic depictions of a deity or revered icon, even if appearing on portions of a garment near the lower border or Pallu, cannot automatically be presumed to be an act driven by deliberate malice or calculated to disrupt public order," the Court said.

To hold that such commercial activities constitute the offence of insulting religious feelings under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), without there being a demonstrable intent to commit such an offence, is impermissible, the Court added.

"Commercial activity involving religious motifs, undertaken without any overt act, inflammatory rhetoric, or demonstrable intent to denigrate a religious belief, does not cross the threshold into a criminally punishable insult under Section 295A (acts intended to outrage religious feelings). To hold otherwise would expand the criminal statute beyond its intended constitutional parameters and penalize commercial practices absent any criminal mens rea," it observed.

The Court passed the ruling on a plea by one Bharatbhai Hirjibhai Shankar. Shankar had approached the Court in 2018 with a plea to quash a criminal case registered by Surat police in 2017 on a complaint made by the President of the Samast Yuva Ambedkar Sama.

The complaint alleged that sarees and other textile fabrics bearing printed impressions of Lord Gautam Buddha were being sold by the traders in Surat.

The complaint alleged that the sale of such sarees degrades the deity and intentionally wounds religious feelings and sentiments of members of the Ambedkar community.

However, the Court opined that there was nothing to suggest insult or any attempt to insult a religion or the religious beliefs of a particular class.

"The applicant is a commercial merchant engaged in the routine business of trading Sarees and dress materials based on prevailing market trends and designs," it noted.

The foundational ingredients of Section 295A of the IPC - specifically, a "deliberate and malicious intention" to outrage religious feelings - are completely absent in the case, the Court ruled.

Therefore, it quashed the criminal proceedings against the accused.

Advocate Rajesh K Kanani represented the petitioner (accused trader).

Additional Public Prosecutor KM Antani represented the State. Advocate NK Majmudar represented another respondent.

[Read Judgment]