Mere Non-Occurrence Of Unrest Does Not Negate Criminality Of The Act: Delhi HC Refuse To Quash Criminal Case Against DU Professor Over 'Shiva Linga' Post On X
The Delhi High Court refused to quash a criminal case filed against an Assistant Professor at Delhi University, in connection with a controversial post he made on X (formerly Twitter) about a 'Shiva Linga' allegedly discovered at the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi.
The post in question read: "Yadi yeh Shiv Ling hai to Lagta hai shayad Shiv ji ka bhi khatna kar diya gaya tha" (loosely translated: "If this is a Shiva Linga, it seems that Shiva was also circumcised").
A Bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh emphasized that the professor's comment appeared to be intentionally provocative, likely aimed at hurting religious sentiments and disturbing public harmony. The Court said, “This Court is of the view that prima facie, the petitioner has created disturbance of the harmony of the society and this Court has also found that the said tweet/post were made with the intention-to hurt the sentiments of a large number of the society,”
The Court added: “Merely stating that no unrest or disharmony happened in the society cannot be a ground for quashing of the impugned FIR registered under Sections 153A and 295A of the IPC. The same is based on the premise that mere non- occurrence of unrest in the society does not negate the criminality of the petitioner‟s act as the said act of the petitioner was done with the intent, foresight and possibility of creating disturbance and disharmony in the society, thereby, causing unrest."
The Court further underlined that the freedom of speech, especially for someone in an intellectual or academic position, is not absolute. It held, “No person being 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,”
The ruling also referenced the 'Shiv Puran, Vidhweshwar Samhita', citing specific verses that explain the religious and cultural significance of the Shiva Linga. The Court added, “it is obvious that the act and remarks made by the petitioner are contrary to the beliefs and customs followed and practiced by the worshippers and believers of Lord Shiva/Shiva Linga.”
The High Court’s opinion was that the post not only hurt the religious sentiments of the complainant, but also contributed to increasing hatred, enmity, and communal tensions between different communities. It noted, “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,”
The Court dismissed his petition to dismiss the criminal case, allowing the charges to proceed.
Cause Title: Dr. Ratan Lal v. State Govt. of Delhi & Anr. [2024:DHC:9849]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Aditya Kumar Choudhary, Sandeep Pandey, Aditya Anand Singh, and Anurag Yadav
Respondents: Additional Public Prosecutor Yudhvir Singh
