Himachal Pradesh HC refuses to quash FIR over distribution of Rampal’s books containing views against Hindu gods

The Himachal Pradesh High Court on Friday refused to quash a First Information Report (FIR) accusing 13 men of distributing books with defamatory material against Hindu gods and saints [Vivek Kumar and Others v State of HP]

However, Justice Rakesh Kainthla quashed proceedings pending against them before a Solan court on the ground that sanction for prosecution under Section 295-A (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings) of Indian Penal Code (IPC) had not been obtained from the competent authority. 

The Court ruled that cognizance of the offence was without jurisdiction. It said that the prosecution shall be at liberty to institute fresh proceedings after obtaining the sanction.

"This order will not prevent the State from instituting the fresh proceedings after obtaining the sanction, if otherwise permissible under the law. The petitioners shall be at liberty to raise all the pleas before the learned Trial Court if any such charge sheet is filed."

In the case registered in June 2023, it was alleged that the accused were distributing books written by Sant Rampal which allegedly contained defamatory content against Hindu religion.

Seeking quashing of the case, advocate Arjun Sheoran, counsel representing the accused, submitted that the complainant had cited statements from the books out of context.

He also said that no prosecution sanction was obtained from the competent authority as required under law.

The State responded that a letter seeking prosecution sanction was written to the district magistrate on June 13. It also said that the books were distributed to hurt the sentiments of Hindus.

Considering the submissions, the Court ruled the FIR discloses commission of a cognizable offence. It added that whether the contents of books are justified or not would be determined by the trial court.

“Prima facie, making the defamatory remarks against the Hindu Gods and Saints who are revered by Hindus can lead to an inference that these were made with the intent to outrage the religious beliefs of the class of citizens of India by insulting their religion and religious beliefs. Thus, it is impermissible to quash the FIR at this stage,” the Court said.

It added that the right to freedom of speech and expression is not absolute but subject to public order. On the argument that the books were available in the public domain and their circulation does not constitute any offence, the Court said,

 “This is a matter of proof, and it will be open to the petitioners to prove before the Court that books were being circulated widely, and nothing is required to be said by this Court at this stage.”

Consequently, the petition filed by the accused was only partly allowed. The Court refused to quash the FIR but set aside the proceedings before the trial court with a liberty to initiate them again after proper sanction. 

Advocates Arjun Sheoran and Heena Chauhan represented the petitioners.

Additional Advocate General Lokender Kutlehria represented the State.

Advocate Dhanwanti appeared for the complainant.

[Read Judgment]