New Delhi: Citing religious scriptures like the Shiva Purana, the Delhi High Court dismissed a plea filed by Hindu College associate professor of history, Dr Ratan Lal, seeking to quash an FIR registered against him for commission of offences punishable under Sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Section 153A pertains to acts promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion and race and 295-A relates to acts intended to outrage religious feelings.
“This court is of the view that prima facie, the petitioner has created disturbance to the harmony of society and this court has also found that the said tweet/post was made with the intention to hurt the sentiments of a large number of (people),” the bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh ruled Tuesday.
The professor had in May 2022 put out a post on social media on the claims of a ‘Shiva Linga’ being found at the Gyanvapi complex in Varanasi.
Subsequently, one Shiwal Bhalla filed a complaint against him, which led to the registration of an FIR against Lal on 18 May, 2022, under IPC Sections 153A and 295A. The professor was arrested by the Delhi Police but was granted regular bail a day later.
Later, when Lal applied for a visa to the UK, he received an email from the British High Commission in New Delhi, saying that his application needed police verification, he told the high court in his petition. Ultimately, the visa was rejected.
In July last year, he stated, his promotion was kept pending by his college principal who stated that it was because he had an FIR against his name. This is what led the professor to approach the court for quashing of the FIR against him, he stated.
Section 153A of the IPC is punishable with imprisonment of up to three years, or, a fine, or both. Section 295A is also punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or a fine, or both.
Also Read: Who’s Ratan Lal? ‘Outspoken professor’ booked for Gyanvapi post said to ‘champion the oppressed’
‘Any type of freedom is not absolute’
The high court said Tuesday that no person, who is a “professor, teacher, or an intellectual” has the right to make “such type of comments, tweets or posts as the freedom of speech and expression or any type of freedom is not absolute”.
In its 26-page ruling, the court stated: “The act of the petitioner, by making posts on Twitter and Facebook, with a photo of the ‘Shiva Linga’ with derogatory remarks not only shows that there is a visual representation in terms of Sections 153A and 295A but also shows the deliberate and malicious intent on the part of the petitioner.”
Rejecting the petitioners’ recourse to the right to freedom of speech and expression, the court pointed out how such a right is not absolute in nature.
It also said that at such a juncture, it is “pertinent” for the court to narrate the “etymology and concept of Shiva Linga” which is worshipped by the followers of Lord Shiva.
Relying on the “Shiv Purana’s Vidhveshwar Samhita” chapter to explain the genesis of the Shiva Linga, the court said: “In Shiv Purana, Vidhveshwar Samhita, it has been stated that once Shri Brahma and Shri Vishnu had a war of words about who is supreme among them which soon turned into a battle. Equipped with mighty weapons, Shri Brahma and Shri Vishnu started attacking each other. As the war escalated and turned apocalyptical, an endless luminous pillar appeared between them and sucked their weapons.”
The court asserted that the content posted by the petitioner (Lal) had not only hurt the religious sentiments of the complainant (Bhalla) but also promoted hatred, enmity and communal tensions among two different communities.
The court also stated that the petitioner made repeated comments, even after registration of FIR, that further “showed the deliberate and criminal act of the petitioner which definitely attracts the applicability of Sections 153A and 295A of the IPC”.
The court also emphasised that petitioner Lal, being a historian and an educator, owed a greater responsibility to the society at large as he was a role model.
“An intellectual person is instrumental in guiding others and the society at large and thus, he should be more conscious while giving such type of statements in a public domain as the same carries weight and power to influence other people,” it said.
(Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui)
Also Read: DU prof gets bail in ‘Shivling’ post case but protests go on as students slam ‘systematic attack’
Just imagine if Prof. Ratan Lal had made similar statements about the Gods of other religions. Would our secular-liberal friends have remained quiet? Would the Left-liberal brigade been so conspicuous by their silence?
Let’s face the truth. If Prof. Lal had made such derogatory statements about the Islamic God, he would have been subjected to multiple fatwas and “Sar tan se juda” acts by Muslims. And the Left-liberal ecosystem would have bayed for his blood.
Excellent decision by the High Court.
People like Ratan Lal are scum of our society. Allowing them to go scot free is absolutely not acceptable. His appointment at a reputed college like Hindu College must be investigated.
The college management must initiate strict and exemplary action against Ratan Lal. Also, the govt must confiscate his passport.