Investigation into the circulation of obscene images of Hindu deities on WhatsApp continues without prior government sanction, as court clarifies legal provisions under IPC Section 295A.
In a significant judgment, the Karnataka High Court has ruled that prior sanction from the government is not required for the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) or for conducting an investigation under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings. The ruling comes in the context of the case involving the circulation of obscene images of Hindu deities on a WhatsApp group, which is said to have caused mental trauma to the complainant and threatened communal harmony.
The judgment was delivered by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, who emphasized that the statutory provision under Section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) necessitates sanction only at the stage when the court takes cognizance of the offence, following the submission of the final report by the investigating agency. The court clarified that this provision does not impede the police's ability to register a FIR or conduct an investigation.
The petitioner, Sri Sirajuddin, had challenged the registration of the crime, arguing that the FIR was invalid due to the absence of prior sanction. However, the court dismissed this contention, noting that the investigation is at a preliminary stage, and the requirement of sanction under Section 196 CrPC will be applicable only when the court takes cognizance of the offence.
The case originated when a complainant, K. Jayaraj Salian, reported receiving a WhatsApp link from an unknown source, which led him to a group named "Bajarangi Go Kallaru." The group allegedly circulated deeply offensive images of Hindu deities and political figures, prompting the complainant to lodge a complaint, fearing communal violence and citing personal mental trauma.
Justice Nagaprasanna cited several precedents, including judgments from the Supreme Court and other High Courts, to underscore that the bar under Section 196 CrPC is against the court taking cognizance, not against the police investigating the matter. The court also highlighted that the content shared in the WhatsApp group prima facie meets the ingredients of Section 295A IPC, as it has the tendency to outrage religious feelings and disturb communal harmony.
The judgment noted that while the investigation should proceed without prior sanction, it must be conducted uniformly against all administrators of the group involved in the alleged circulation of offensive material. The Investigating Officer was directed to conclude the investigation expeditiously.
This ruling is expected to set a precedent for handling similar cases involving offences under Section 295A IPC and could influence future legal interpretations of the requirement for government sanction in cases involving religious sentiments.
Bottom Line:
Section 295A IPC - Prior sanction under Section 196 Cr.P.C. is not required for the registration of an FIR or for conducting investigation. Sanction becomes mandatory only when the Court takes cognizance upon presentation of the final report.
Statutory provision(s): Section 295A IPC, Section 196 CrPC, Section 67 Information Technology Act, 2008
Sri Sirajuddin v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2845923
