hurting religious sentiments

Watch | What Is the Controversy About Aamir Khan’s AU Bank Advertisement?

Yaqut Ali does a fact check of Madhya Pradesh home minister Narottam Mishra’s claim regarding Indian culture.

An advertisement for AU Bank recently sparked controversy after Narottam Mishra, the Madhya Pradesh home minister, said that it hurts the religious sentiments of a particular community and that he should respect “Indian culture”. He asked Aamir Khan, who was part of the advertisement, not to appear in such commercials. Due to Mishra’s statements and the controversy, AU Bank was compelled to take down the advertisement. Yaqut Ali of The Wire does a fact check of Narottam Mishra’s claim regarding Indian culture. Watch the video to understand.

Insults To Religion Without Deliberate Intention Not Offence Under Section 295A IPC: Tripura HC

The court noted that the section penalises only those acts of insults or attempts which have been perpetrated with the “deliberate and malicious intention” of outraging the religious feelings of a particular class.

New Delhi: The Tripura high court (HC) has held that insults to religion made without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of a class would not amount to an offence under Section 295A of IPC, LiveLaw reported.

The single bench of Chief Justice Akil Kureshi noted: “Section 295A does not penalise any and every act of insult or an attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs but it penalises only those acts of insults or attempts which have been perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of a particular class.”

“Insults to religion made unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of a class would not come within the said section.”

The high court made these observations while quashing an FIR registered against the petitioner last year for allegedly hurting the religious sentiments of the Hindu community by posting on Facebook about the Bhagavad Gita.

Also read: India’s Bogey of ‘Hurt Sentiments’ Is a Ploy To Persecute the ‘Others’

The complainant accused the petitioner of making “untasteful and obscene comments” on Hindu religion by saying that the Gita, the sacred religious text, is a “thakbaji Gita”.

The petitioner, however, said the Facebook post (in Bengali) was being misinterpreted while saying that his intention was not to hurt religious sentiments. It actually meant that the Gita is a pan which fries swindlers.

Section 295A states that whoever, “with deliberate and malicious intention” of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, by words, either spoken or written, or by songs or by visible representations or otherwise, insults or attempts to insult the religion or religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

The bench also referred to the findings of a constitution bench of the Supreme Court in Ramji Lal Modi v. State of UP, AIR 1957 SC 620, wherein the SC judge held:

“Section 295A only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. The calculated tendency of this aggravated form of insult is clearly to disrupt the public order and the section, which penalises such activities, is well within the protection of clause (2) of Article 19 as being a law imposing reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a).

Having regard to the ingredients of the offence created by the impugned section, there cannot, in our opinion, be any possibility of this law being applied for purposes not sanctioned by the constitution. In other words, the language employed in the section is not wide enough to cover restrictions both within and without the limits of constitutionally permissible legislative action affecting the fundamental right guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a).”

Also read: UP: Madrasas Protest Move To Make Teaching of Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana Mandatory

Cases under section 295A

Stand-up comic Munawar Faruqui along with four other persons – Nalin Yadav, Prakhar Vyas, Edwin Anthony and Priyam Vyas – were booked under IPC section 295A for allegedly passing “indecent remarks” about Hindu deities and Union home minister Amit Shah during a New Year show at a cafe in Indore. According to the police, the arrest was made on the basis of “oral evidence” by a BJP MLA’s son who “overheard” Faruqui rehearsing jokes that he was “going to” say in his act.

He was arrested on January 1 and granted bail by the Supreme Court on February 5.

An FIR was filed against Aparna Purohit, Amazon Prime Video’s India head, among others over the screening of the web series Tandav, under 295A of IPC for allegedly hurting religious sentiments. The FIR said the series allegedly depicts Hindu gods in a disrespectful manner.

Tandav also has episodes that refer to the farmers’ protest and violence on the Jawaharlal Nehru University campus. The movie is directed by Ali Abbas Zafar, who is also named in the FIR.

Siddique Kappan, a Delhi-based Malayalam-language journalist and secretary of the Kerala Union of working Journalists’ Delhi unit, was arrested along with three others in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh while on his way to cover the Hathras gang-rape and murder case. He was also charged under section 295(A) of IPC among others, including the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

Kappan was arrested on October 5 last year.

‘OTT Platforms at Times Show Pornographic Content, Need Screening’: Supreme Court

The apex court was hearing the appeal of Amazon Prime Video’s India head Aparna Purohit against the Allahabad high court order rejecting her anticipatory bail in connection with FIRs lodged over ‘Tandav.’

New Delhi: Some over-the-top (OTT) platforms at times show pornographic content and there should be a mechanism to screen such programmes, the Supreme Court said on Thursday, March 4, and asked the Centre to place its guidelines on regulating social media.

The apex court also fixed on Friday the hearing on the appeal of Amazon Prime Video’s India head Aparna Purohit against the Allahabad high court order rejecting her anticipatory bail in connection with FIRs lodged over web series Tandav.

“We are of the view that some screening of OTT content should take place. A balance has to be struck as some OTT platforms are also showing pornographic materials on their platforms,” a bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and R.S. Reddy said.

During the brief hearing conducted through video conferencing, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Purohit, said the FIRs against her are “shocking” as she is an employee of Amazon and neither a producer nor an actor but still she has been made an accused in around 10 cases relating to the web series across the country.

Also read: Amazon Prime Video Apologises Once Again for ‘Tandav’

“These are all publicity seekers who have been filing cases all over India. Look at the FIR, look at what is happening. If you want to watch this web series, you have to pay to see this,” the senior lawyer said.

Several FIRs have been lodged in states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Bihar and Delhi.

The bench said that though traditional film viewing has become “obsolete,” those films are under a censor board.

“Our query is whether some screening is necessary or not, because you watch anything in your home like a cinema hall,” the bench observed.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said, “They are showing filthy things with abuses too”.

Mehta said he would be placing on records the Information Technology (Guidelines for intermediaries and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

Also read | Explainer: How the New IT Rules Take Away Our Digital Rights

Rohatgi on the other hand said the case against Purohit cannot be based on the regulation which is yet to come in force.

Tandav, a nine-episode political thriller starring Bollywood actors Saif Ali Khan, Dimple Kapadia and Mohammad Zeeshan Ayyub, started streaming recently.

Purohit has been accused of inappropriate depiction of Uttar Pradesh police personnel, Hindu deities and an adverse portrayal of a character playing the prime minister in the web series.

Earlier, the apex court, on January 27, had declined to grant interim protection from any coercive action to Ali Abbas Zafar, Director of the web series, Purohit, producer Himanshu Mehra, the show’s writer Gaurav Solanki and actor Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub.

It had said that they may seek bail from courts concerned in the FIRs lodged in connection with the web series.

Now, Purohit has appealed to the top court against the Allahabad high court’s February 25 order declining anticipatory bail to her.

The high court had observed, “Western filmmakers have refrained from ridiculing Lord Jesus or the Prophet but Hindi filmmakers have done this repeatedly and are still doing this most unabashedly with Hindu gods and goddesses.”

Amazon Prime Video Apologises Once Again for ‘Tandav’

This is the platform’s third apology for the show.

New Delhi: Streaming platform Amazon Prime Video, on Tuesday, once again apologised for its show Tandav and said it has already removed scenes found objectionable by viewers. This is the platform’s third apology for the show.

The cast and the crew of the Ali Abbas Zafar-directed series have apologised twice before.

The political saga, starring Saif Ali Khan and Mohammad Zeeshan Ayyub, attracted a volley of outrage from a section of viewers for a scene depicting a college theatre programme with a mention of religious figures, leading to allegations that the show hurt religious sentiments.

Multiple FIRs were filed against the showrunners. One of the charges was that the show had encouraged “an adverse portrayal of a character playing the prime minister”.

Some portions of the series were cut following outrage as it released.

On February 25, rejecting the anticipatory bail plea filed by the head of Amazon Prime Video’s India Originals Aparna Purohit, the Allahabad high court had observed that “names and icons of faith of the majority community have been used to earn money”.

“Amazon Prime Video again deeply regrets that viewers considered certain scenes to be objectionable in the recently launched fictional series ‘Tandav’. This was never our intention, and the scenes that were objected to were removed or edited when they were brought to our attention,” Amazon Prime said in a statement.

“We respect our viewers’ diverse beliefs and apologise unconditionally to anyone who felt hurt by these scenes. Our teams follow company content evaluation processes, which we acknowledge need to be constantly updated to better serve our audiences,” the company added.

The streamer said it will continue to develop entertaining content with partners while “complying with the laws of India and respecting the diversity of culture and beliefs of our audiences”.

Although legal cases against Netflix and Amazon Prime Video shows for offending beliefs are not uncommon in India, it is rare for a US tech giant to publicly apologise, Reuters has noted in its report.

(With PTI inputs)

‘Tandav’: Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Aparna Purohit, Raps ‘Irresponsible’ Actions

The court observed that Hindi filmmakers have used the “names and icons of faith of the majority community” to earn money.

New Delhi: Rejecting the anticipatory bail plea filed by the head of Amazon Prime Video’s India Originals Aparna Purohit, the Allahabad high court on Thursday observed that “names and icons of faith of the majority community have been used to earn money”.

Purohit has been booked for various offences, after a complaint against her was registered for “inappropriate depiction of Uttar Pradesh police personnel, Hindu deities and an adverse portrayal of a character playing the prime minister” in Amazon Prime’s web series Tandav. Complaints have been filed at various locations and the court was hearing the matter regarding an FIR registered in Noida.

A single-judge bench of Justice Sidharth noted, “Western filmmakers have refrained from ridiculing Lord Jesus or the Prophet but Hindi filmmakers have done this repeatedly and are still doing this most unabashedly with Hindu gods and goddesses.”

Also Read: Life of Brian at 40: An Assertion of Individual Freedom That Still Resonates

The court listed some movies “which have used the name of Hindu gods and goddesses and shown them in disrespectful manner”, such as Ram Teri Ganga Maili, Satyam Shivam Sundram, PK and Oh My God.

“Not only this, efforts have been made to subvert the image of historical and mythological personalities as in Padmavati. The names and icons of faith of the majority community have been used to earn money (Goliyon Ki Rasleela Ram Leela),” the court said.

“This tendency on the part of the Hindi film industry is growing and if not curbed in time, it may have disastrous consequences for the Indian social, religious and communal order,” Justice Sidharth observed.

According to LiveLaw, the order also referred to the arrest of comedian Munawar Faruqui.

“Things are worsening as is evident from the fact that an obscure stand-up comedian, Munawar Faruqui, from Gujarat made comments on Hindu God and Godesses in a new year show at Indore and gained undue publicity on being arrested in a case. This shows that from films this trend has passed to comedy shows,” he said.

The Indore police have admitted that Faruqui did not make any comments on Hindu deities, but justified his arrest on the basis that he was “going to” make jokes that would have hurt religious sentiments.

The court added that “such people make the revered figures of the religion of majority community source of earning money in most brazen manner taking benefit of the liberal and tolerant tradition of country.”

Purohit’s plea was that the web series was a work of fiction and there was no intention to outrage the religious feeling of any community.

The court observed, “The fact remains that the applicant had not been vigilant and has acted irresponsibly making her open to criminal prosecution in permitting streaming of a movie which is against the fundamental rights of the majority of citizens of this country.”

“Therefore, her fundamental right of life and liberty cannot be protected by grant of anticipatory bail to her in the exercise of discretionary powers of this Court,” the court further said.

The judge said that Purohit was granted interim protection in another case registered in Lucknow “but she was not cooperating with the investigation”.

According to the Indian Express, the court said that while making a fictional show, it is the duty “of every citizen to respect the feelings of the people of other faith.”

“The irresponsible conduct against the inherent mandate of the Constitution of India by anyone affecting the fundamental rights of the large number of citizens cannot be acquiesced to only because of the tendering of unconditional apology after committing the alleged act of crime and indiscretion,” the order says.

A mere disclaimer that the show is fictional “cannot be considered to be a ground for absolving the applicant of permitting the streaming of an objectionable movie online”.

The court also criticised the show’s title, saying using the word ‘Tandav’ as the name “can be offensive to the majority of the people of this country since this word is associated with a particular act assigned to Lord Shiva who is considered to be creator, conservator and destroyer of the mankind all together.”

Saif Ali Khan in Tandav. Photo: Amazon Prime

The counsel appearing on behalf of Uttar Pradesh opposed the application, saying that a total of 10 FIRs and four criminal complaints have been filed relating to the disputed web series across the country.

The government submitted that this shows that “merely one person is not affected by the conduct of the applicant and other co-accused persons, rather a number of persons across the country have felt that the web series is offensive and hence, they have lodged FIRs and complaints”.

Cases have also been registered against Tandav‘s director Ali Abbas Zafar, producer Himanshu Krishna Mehra, writer Gaurav Solanki and others. In late January, the Supreme Court declined to grant interim protection to the accused.

‘Tandav’: Allahabad HC Stays Arrest of Amazon Prime Video Head Aparna Purohit

A criminal case has been lodged against Purohit and the makers of the web series ‘Tandav’, which is accused of denigrating Hindu gods and goddesses.

Allahabad: The Allahabad high court on Thursday ordered no coercive action against Amazon Prime Video’s India Originals head Aparna Purohit, who is facing an FIR for the alleged derogatory depiction of Hindu deities in web series Tandav.

A bench of Justice Sidharth granted a temporary reprieve to Purohit against the arrest while reserving its verdict on her anticipatory bail plea.

While reserving the ruling, the bench said no coercive action should be taken against Purohit till the pronouncement of the order.

While pleading for anticipatory bail for Purohit, her counsel submitted to the court that the web series was only a work of fiction and there was no intention of the applicant to outrage the religious feeling of any community.

Also read: Bollywood Is a Major Target for Right Wing Groups Looking for Signs of ‘Hinduphobia’

A criminal case has been lodged against Purohit and the makers and actors of the web series, including its director Ali Abbas, producer Himanshu Krishna Mehra and writer Gaurav Solanki in Rabupura police station of Uttar Pradesh’s Gautam Budh Nagar.

The FIR was lodged on January 19, 2021 on the complaint of Balbir Azad of Raunija village of Greater Noida area.

In his complaint, Azad had alleged that the series depicted Uttar Pradesh and its police in a poor light.

It also said the series had deliberately denigrated Hindu gods and goddesses.

The complainant had alleged that even the prime minister of India was depicted as an anti-democratic individual in the web series, which also carried deliberate remarks aimed at disturbing caste and communal amity.

It was also alleged that the makers of the series wanted to disturb the peace and tranquillity of society to make money.

(PTI)

FIR Against Sharjeel Usmani for ‘Promoting Enmity’ With Speech at Elgar Parishad

The BJP in Maharashtra had demanded action against the AMU alumnus, accusing him of hurting religious sentiments.

Pune: A case for allegedly ‘promoting enmity between different groups’ was registered against Aligarh Muslim University alumnus Sharjeel Usmani in Pune on Tuesday in connection with his speech at the recent Elgar Parishad conclave.

The opposition BJP in Maharashtra had demanded action against Usmani, accusing him of hurting religious sentiments.

A case under section 153 (A) of the IPC (promoting enmity between different groups on the ground religion, etc.) was registered against him, said Pune police commissioner Amitabh Gupta.

Pradip Gavade, a local leader of the Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha, BJP’s youth wing, had filed a complaint with Swargate police station against Usmani, he said.

Also read: Munawar Faruqui Act Hadn’t Even Begun but HC Denies Bail, Says Comic Outraged Religious Feelings

Further investigation is underway, Gupta added.

The Elgar Parishad conclave took place in the city on January 30, 2021.

Writer Arundhati Roy, justice (retd) B.G. Kolse Patil and former IPS official S.M. Mushrif and others also addressed the gathering.

Several Left-leaning activists were arrested by the police who alleged Maoist links following the December 2017 Elgar Parishad conclave and the caste violence at the Bhima Koregaon war memorial.

Earlier in the day, BJP leader Devendra Fadnavis had demanded action against Usmani, alleging that he “insulted sentiments of the Hindu community”.

Goa: FIR Against Professor for ‘Outraging Religious Feelings’

Shilpa Singh was previously the target of a complaint by the ABVP, which claimed that her lectures promote “socially hateful thoughts about a particular religion”.

New Delhi: An FIR was registered on Monday against Shilpa Singh, an assistant professor at a Goa law college, for ‘outraging religious feelings with deliberate and malicious intention’.

The case was filed based on a complaint filed by Rashtriya Hindu Yuva Vahini’s Goa unit member Rajiv Jha, according to the Indian Express. Singh, who teaches political science at Panaji’s VM Salgaocar College of Law, was previously the target of a complaint filed by the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), which objected to the topics that she teaches to her students.

Jha’s complaint was regarding a post that Singh made on Facebook almost six months ago, in which she apparently compared the mangalsutra to a “chained dog”.

Singh has also filed a complaint against Jha, based on which an FIR was registered against him. Singh accuses Jha of criminally intimidating her and that he outraged her modesty via his “abusive” Facebook posts.

According to Deccan Herald, the FIR against Singh says, “The above noted accused person having a Facebook profile in the name of Shilpa Surendra Pratap Singh knowingly uploaded a post through the Facebook account in the public domain with deliberate and malicious intention outraged religious feelings of the complainant, thereby insulted religious belief, thus committed offence under section 295 A IPC.”

The development comes days after the law college responded to the ABVP’s complaint against Singh, saying the body does not have a “locus standi” to raise objections about her teaching. The college refused to terminate her services. The ABVP’s complaint claimed Singh’s lectures promote “socially hateful thoughts about a particular religion”.

According to the Indian Express, Jha said he was aware of the ABVP’s letter but added that he has filed the complaint in a “personal capacity”.

Jha told the paper that he is a “practicing Hindu Brahmin” and described Singh as “Hindu-phobic”. He added: “Since she is a woman I went to the police station. She has filed a counter-compliant of abuse and threat to life. I could have gone directly to the college and sought action. (But) I have not.”

Also Read: ‘Vemula, Dabholkar, Kalburgi’: Goa ABVP Threatens Action Against ‘Anti-Religious’ Lectures

In a Facebook post, Singh said she was the target of a “witch hunt”. She said she does not believe education is “merely rote learning” and she tries to impart “critical tools necessary for students of political science to understand and analyse the complexities, contradictions and emergent power relations animating the realm of politics in the world”.

Before the FIR was filed, Singh said she regrets any hurt she may have caused to women.

“At the outset, I wish to express my regret to my fellow women if any of my facebook posts have caused them hurt and offended them. I am aware that one of my facebook posts was in the eye of the storm due to my personal views on mangalsutra and burqa and it was taken totally out of context. It was never my intention to ridicule religion or women. Since my childhood, I have been curious on questions why we have exclusive marital status symbols for women and not for the men in various cultures practices. It is depressing to see that a false opinion has been created about myself by my detractors – that I am an ‘anti-religion’ or a run-of-the-mill ‘god-hating atheist’. This is far from the truth,” she said.

She said her questioning of cultural practices is in the spirit of “rational enquiry and progressive thinking”. She said she has strived to critically engage with “dominant societal power relations and establishment dogmas, in all aspects of society and would continue to do so”.