The Delhi High Court in the case observed and has stated that the religious feelings and sentiments cannot be so fragile that it can be hurt or it can be provoked by the speech of an individual, wherein the court stated that religious and faith are not as fragile as human beings.
The bench headed by Justice Jasmeet Singh in the case observed and has stated that this court is of the view that India being a country which is unique due to its various religions, faiths and the languages which co-exist with side by side. The unity of its lies in this coexistence. Thus, the religious feeling and the religious sentiments cannot be so fragile as to be hurt or provoked by a speech of an individual.
Adding to it, the court stated that the faith and religion ‘are more resilient’ and the same cannot be hurt or provoked by views or instigation by an individual.
The court in the case stated that the Religion and faith are not as fragile as human beings and they have being survived for centuries and will continue to survive for many more. Thus, the faith and religion are more resilient and cannot be hurt or provoked by views of / instigation by an individual.
The court observed and has quashed the summon order which is issued against Maharashtra Navnirman Sena Chief Raj Thackeray in seven cases which are filed against him wherein it is alleged that the provocative speech, which includes the offence of sedition. Though, the said complaints were being filed in different cities and the Supreme Court in the year 2010 had transferred the proceedings to the Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
The court in the case rejected the prayer for quashing of the criminal complaints, while the party allowing the plea moved by Thackeray’s.
Before the court, it has also been alleged that Thackeray had made certain comments in 2008 with regards to ‘chatth pooja’ festival wherein the religious sentiments of people are hurt which belongs to the community it is celebrated in.
It has also been alleged before the court that his speech across news channels which was allegedly provocative in nature.
The bench of Justice Singh in the case observed and has quashed the summoning orders issued by courts in Patna, Begusarai, Ranchi, and Bokaro, wherein stating that the impugned orders could not be sustained as there being no sanction to prosecute Thackeray for offences such as section 124A, section 153A, section 153B and section 295A of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Therefore, the court in the case observed that in other cases, no inquiry was being conducted by the Magistrate before proceeding
to issue summons.
