Assam Police Arrest Pawan Khera: Prime Minister Narendra Modi But Congress media in-charge Pawan Kheda was arrested from Delhi airport on the alleged charge of making indecent remarks. However, later he got bail from the Supreme Court. The Congress strongly criticized the BJP regarding this matter and said that democracy is in danger. Sections other than 153A are mentioned in the FIRs lodged against Pawan Kheda in several states.
These legal procedures are often criticized for violating freedom of expression and serving political purposes. While giving immediate relief to Kheda, the Supreme Court directed that he be released on interim bail till February 28. CJI DY Chandrachud’s bench said that during this time the petitioners can file a regular bail petition in the concerned court. The court also told Kheda that there should be some level of dialogue. So let’s know about section 153A on Kheda-
What does section 153A say
Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is invoked in cases of ‘promoting enmity and disturbing harmony between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc.’, reports the Indian Express . There is a provision of imprisonment up to 3 years, or fine, or both. It was enacted in 1898 and was not a part of the original Penal Code. At the time of the amendment, promoting class enmity was a part of the English law of sedition, but was not included in the Indian law.
In the Rangila Rasool case before independence, the Punjab High Court acquitted a Hindu publisher of a tract which made derogatory remarks about the personal life of the Prophet and was held to be an accused under section 153A. In his book ‘Offend, Shock or Disturb: Free Speech Under the Indian Constitution’, lawyer Gautam Bhatia writes that the High Court has held that ‘objectionable remarks on a particular community and A distinction was made between ‘comments on the late leader of that community’.
Which streams at Pawan Kheda?
When another similar article was published again, the High Court said that ‘derogatory and false remarks on a religious leader would prima facie fall within section 153A – although not every criticism’. In the FIR lodged against Pawan Khera, he was charged under 153B(1) of IPC (making assertions prejudicial to national integration); 295A (deliberate and malicious act intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs); 500 (defamation); and 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) sections were imposed.
How to avoid misuse of law?
The provisions are broadly defined, with safeguards against misuse. For example, sections 153A and 153B require prior sanction from the government to initiate prosecution but before the commencement of the trial and not at the stage of preliminary investigation. To curb indiscriminate arrests, the Supreme Court laid down some guidelines in its 2014 judgment in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
As per these guidelines, for offenses punishable less than 7 years, the police cannot arrest an accused before investigation. The Supreme Court said in one of its decisions in the year 2021 that under Section 153A, the state will have to prove its intention to punish an accused. In this case, the Supreme Court quashed the FIR lodged against Patricia Mukhim, editor of The Shillong Times, for allegedly creating communal disharmony through a Facebook post.
What did the Supreme Court say?
The top court had said in its judgment, ‘Intent to create anarchy or incite people to violence is an essential part of the offense under Section 153A of the IPC and the prosecution has to prove that the accused is convicted under it. His intention was to create anarchy or incite people to violence. The court had further said, ‘The words used in the alleged criminal speech must be judged from the perspective of a person of rational and strong mind, firm and courageous, and not from the perspective of a person of weak and unstable mind who, in his every criticism, threatens danger. Let’s guess.’
read this also: Congress does not understand that its every insult becomes double strength!
