HC gives interim relief to Raveena Tandon, Bharti Singh, Farah Khan in plea to quash FIR for hurting religious sentiments on "Backbenchers"

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has recently granted interim relief to Raveena Tandon, Farah Khan and Bharti Singh in a case filed against them for allegedly having hurt religious sentiments on Khan's show "Backbenchers." .An FIR was filed under Section 295-A of Indian Penal Code against the Bollywood celebrities after they allegedly made fun of the word "Hallelujah" while on the show..On Thursday, the Punjab and Haryana High Court issued notice in the plea filed to quash this FIR..In doing so, Justice Sudip Ahluwalia also directed that no coercive steps should be taken against the petitioners until the next date of hearing. The matter is next listed for hearing on March 25..The FIR was filed against the Bollywood personalities alleging that they had made a joke out of the word “Hallelujah”and that the were, thus, guilty of playing with the religious sentiments of the Christian community..The alleged incident took place during a conversation telecast in the 14th episode of "Backbenchers", between participants, Raveena Tandon and Bharti Singh and the show's host, Farah Khan, at Mumbai on November 30, 2019..The show is a non-scripted comedy-based web quiz show hosted by Khan and released as a Flipkart Video Originals..The alleged incident is said to have happened in the 2nd round of the written-test, where the two participants were asked by the host to spell the word “Hallelujah” and also to disclose its meaning..As per the pleas to quash the FIR, Raveena Tandon is said to have spelled the word correctly, although she did not explain its meaning or narrate anything further.Bharti Singh, not knowing the origin and context of the word, mis-spelled it and referred it to an identical word in Hindi, of which only the pronunciation resembled..While narrating these facts, the petitioners have contended that the ingredients under Section 295A, IPC have not been made out..It has been pointed out that the said provision would be attracted only when there is an aggravated action to insult a religion, which has been perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of a community..It is further submitted by the petitioners that Bharti Singh did not know the word and was referring to another word in Hindi. As such it could not lead to the presumption that the act was intended to hurt the religious sentiments of a community..The petitioners have placed reliance on various Supreme Court judgements, in which it has been held that insults to religions offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention do not come within the purview of Section 295A, IPC..The petitions have been filed on behalf of the petitioners through Advocates Abhinav Sood, Gaurav Girish Shukla, Pallav Mongia and Rohit Sharma..[Read the Order here]