Download
1 / 23
230 likes | 413 Views
Media Law Section 295 A. What does it say?. Section 295 A
E N D
What does it say? Section 295 A • Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the intentions of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult to their religion shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
The ‘Bidaai-Valmiki’ Row • Television serial ‘Bidaai’ referred to MaharshiValmiki (author of the Indian holy book Ramayan) as a dacoit. • An FIR was filed against TV Channel STAR Plus in Jalandhar for airing a serial that raised a question about Valmiki being a dacoit before he turned into a sage. • STAR Plus in return appealed in courtthat FIR No.322 dated 6.10.2009 registered at P.S. Division No.4, Jalandhar and all proceedings emanating there from be quashed.
The ‘Bidaai-Valmiki’ Row • An extract of the FIR, as translated by counsel for the petitioner : • In regard to legal action against a bad character who has spoken bad words against Lord Valmiki in STAR Plus Channel's serial Bidai. Sir, it is submitted that I am Navvikas (Simpu), Caste Balmiki, resident of 650, Rishi Nagar, Model Town, Jallandhar. Today on dated 6.10.2009, in the serial Bidai which is being telecast by Crl.Misc.No.M-30035 of 2009 2 Channel STAR Plus, in this serial the bad words have been uttered against BhagwanBalmikiJi and I am eye witness to the same. I was watching this serial at my house when the entire country was also watching this serial. Upon watching this serial the entire Valmiki community gathered at the Valmiki Temple Ali Mohalla and held an agitation. We on behalf of the entire society demand legal action against this Serial and this Channel (Star Plus). Strict action be taken against the accused so that no untoward incident happens in the City. In the event, the Police Administration fails to take any strict action then they shall be responsible for it. Legal action should be taken against the accused for hurting the religious sentiments. Thanking you, yours faithfully, Navvikas (Simpy) BhagwanValmikiSener (PB) Sd/-
The ‘Bidaai-Valmiki’ Row • The complainant alleges that during the telecast of a television serial, a character used derogatory words to describe Lord Valmiki that have led to the commission of an offence under Section 295-A of the I.P.C. • The police registered an FIR and commenced investigation. • Counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations levelled in the FIR, even if accepted as true, do not disclose the commission of any offence, much less an offence under Section 295-A of the IPC.
The ‘Bidaai-Valmiki’ Row • A perusal of the script discloses that a character in this serial, asked a question, whether Lord Valmiki was a thief before he became a sadhu and if true can a man undergo such a great change. In response, the other character made laudatory references to Lord Valmiki. • It is argued that the words used by the characters do not fall within the mischief of Section 295-A of the IPC. An offence under Section 295-A of the IPC, inhers a deliberate and malicious intent to outrage religious feelings and beliefs.
The ‘Bidaai-Valmiki’ Row • The dialogue is devoid of any insult or intention to outrage the religious feelings of any class, religion or community. It is further argued that ancient religious Crl.Misc.No.M-30035 of 2009 4 texts clearly refer to Lord Valmiki as a robber before he became a saint. • Whether these texts are historically accurate or not, cannot be vouchsafed but as the tele serial merely recounts a widely held belief that Lord Valmiki was a robber, before he became a saint, no offence is made out. This widely held belief finds mention in a large number of judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and, therefore, to prosecute the petitioner is a misuse of the process of law.
The ‘Bidaai-Valmiki’ Row • The hearing was presided by Honourable Justice Rajiv Bhalla. • A character in the teleserial asks another character whether Maharishi Valmiki was a dacoit before he became a saint. The other character, while not denying this fact, makes laudatory references to Maharishi Valmiki. • "The research appears to cast a doubt about the authenticity of the story that Maharishi Valamiki was a dacoit," observed Justice Bhalla. He quoted the research done by the head of the Maharishi Valmiki Chair of the Punjabi University, Patiala, ManjulaSehdev, on the origin and authenticity of the belief that Valmiki was a dacoit.
The ‘Bidaai-Valmiki’ Row • Another argument pressed into service is that the petitioner is protected by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The primary role of the press and the electronic media is to educate, mould public opinion and become an instrument of social change. A free press and a free electronic media that encourages public debate, on sensitive matters, within the confines of civility, is the sine qua non of a mature democracy. The petitioner, therefore, cannot be prosecuted for an offence under Section 295- A of the Penal Code.
The ‘Bidaai-Valmiki’ Row • It is further argued that Section 295-A of the IPC does not criminalize any and every act of insult or attempt to insult, but only such acts or insults which are perpetrated with a deliberate and malicious intent to outrage the religious feelings of a particular class. It is argued that perceived insults that are unwittingly or carelessly made without any deliberate or malicious intent, cannot form the basis for registration and investigation of an FIR under Section 295-A of the IPC.
The ‘Bidaai-Valmiki’ Row • Justice Bhalla dismissed the petition filed by the channel and observed: "Electronic media with its immense power and reach must pause, reflect and exercise a greater degree of restraint and responsibility, particularly when it seeks to disseminate religious information likely to affect the sensibility of its audience." • However, the high court made it clear that their opinion would not affect the investigation of the case, which is being conducted by the Jalandhar police against the channel.
Oppression on "Vijayavihaaram" for exposing the misdeeds of:PuttaparthiSatyaSaiBaba • "Vijayavihaaram" is a popular Telugu Monthly Magazine. • It has been propagating scientific approach, spirit of enquiry, personality development & humanism among youth of Andhra Pradesh. • Articles, features & Serials to propagate the great ideals of Mahatma Gandhi, Ambedkar, Vivekananda & DayanandaSaraswati have appeared in "Vijayavihaaram”
A serial exposing the misdeeds of SatyaSai Baba of Puttaparthi has become highly popular in this Magazine. • The serial named, "EeeBuridee Baba DemudelaAyyadu?" (How come this cheater Baba becomes a God?) has attracted the anger of the most powerful Lobby of Baba Devotees in Andhra Pradesh Government Administration. • Magazine has to face threats from Devotees including death threats to the Editor.
How The Problem Started? • "Vijayavihaaram" December month issue was released as a special issue focusing on the Sexual Allegations on SatyaSai Baba. • The cover page itself carried the picture of Baba • From the day one of its release this issue become a big hit creating panic in Baba’s lobby. • On 14th December Police Batalions from 4 police stations led by four police commissioners raided Vijayavihaaram’s office & seized it.
State wide, police seized Vijayavihaaram copies from the Market, Hawkars & Agents were harassed, at some places even they were apprehended. • On 14th December Police booked a case against the Editor of Vijayavihaaram, Mr. RamanaMurty under sections I.P.C. 153 (B) & 295 (A), charging him for publishing an objectionable article named "DayanandaSwamyBhavalu". • Police claimed that this article is disturbing communal harmony.
March 2, 2009: “Is religion beyond media scrutiny?” • This debate was organised by FMP in the wake of the arrests of three editors allegedly for offending religious feelings of either Hindus or Muslims
Tracing the history of the blasphemy law in India, moderator Manoj Mitta, senior editor of The Times of India, pointed out that section 295A, which was inserted in the Indian Penal Code in 1927, is meant to penalise only those insults to religion that have been committed with “a deliberate and malicious intention”. • It is obvious that none of the three arrested editors has committed the alleged crime with such an intention. Given the growing misuse of the blasphemy law against journalists and other practioners of free speech and expression, Mitta raised the question whether the time has come for India to repeal or at least reform section 295A IPC. He added that while Pakistan supplemented section 295A with more draconian provisions, Britain repealed its age-old blasphemy law in 2008.
Reflecting the diversity of views on this sensitive subject, ChandanMitra, editor of Pioneer and RajyaSabha member, rejected the suggestion that there was any need to provide further safeguards against the misuse of section 295A. Citing the controversy over M F Hussain’s nude paintings of Goddess Saraswati, he called upon journalists to display greater restraint in deference to religious sentiments and the sheer volatility of Indian society. He added that in some cases the editors could have been arrested more to save them from popular wrath than to punish them.
Recalling the setbacks she had herself suffered because of the conflict between freedom of expression and religious fundamentalism, actress-film maker Nandita Das lamented the steady decline of tolerance in India over the last decade. The delay in the release of her award-winning directorial debut Firaaq, based on the aftermath of Gujarat riots, is a case in point.She appreciated the initiative of holding a nuanced discussion on religion and its implications.
