WEDNESDAY, MAY 08, 2024
Team Herald
PANJIM: The Bombay High Court at Goa has referred to the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj ordering release of a woman when a stone thrown by her at a tree to fetch mangoes accidentally hit him and he rewarded her with wealtah that would support her for the rest of her life.
“If a tree which is not a highly elevated living entity can be so tolerant and merciful to give sweet mangoes even when hit by anyone, being a king, should I not be more merciful and tolerant than the tree?”
These observations were made by the division bench comprising Justices Mahesh Sonak and Valmiki Menezes while quashing FIR registered against Rev Fr Bolmax Pereira by the Vasco Police for his remarks on warrior king Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj that he made during a sermon on July 30 last year.
The petitioner submitted that the FIR discloses no commission of any offences under Sections 295-A and 504 of IPC. There is nothing in the complaint or the sermon on which the complaint is based to suggest that the petitioner was involved in any class of citizens of India by insulting religion or religious beliefs and prayed that the FIR be quashed.
Additional Public Prosecutor Pravin Faldesai told the court that the veracity of all allegations cannot be tested at this stage and that the investigations were going on and there was sufficient material justifying the registration of the FIR.
Another respondent Kiran Naik argued that Shivaji Maharaj holds the place of God and that the petitioner by publicly stating that Shivaji Maharaj was not God but only a national hero had insulted his religion. For all these reasons, Naik said that the criminal revision petition be dismissed.
The entire Konkani transcript delivered by Fr Bolmax was translated into English and recorded on the paper book. But a short clip of his recorded sermon broadcast on July 30, 2023 was circulated on social media by some miscreants alleging that some of the sermon was maligning Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj.
The Court observed that there was nothing suggesting any insult or attempt to insult any religion or religious belief of the respondent or the class to which he belongs.
The petitioner's utterances particularly in the sermon in which they were allegedly made or from the language used, cannot be construed as ‘insult’ to attract the Section 295-A or 504 of IPC, which is a non-cognisable offence.
Besides this there is absolutely nothing to suggest any deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of the respondent Kiran Naik or any class of citizens of India.
From the tenor of the sermon, no case of incitement is also made out.
Shivaji Maharaj was a national hero and that he has done a lot of good and expressing such a viewpoint and that too respectably does not attract the provisions of either Section 295-A or Section 504 of IPC given the law that the alleged offending words must be judged from the standards of reasonable, strong- minded, firm and courageous men and not those of weak and vacillating minds not of those who scent danger in very hostile point of view.
The petitioner's sermon can be elevated to the level of ‘incitement’ from the tenor of the sermon it is clear that the petitioner wishes to engage in a discussion. The petitioner expressed his viewpoint and that too in a respectable manner.
The respondent (Kiran Naik) may disagree with or even detest the viewpoint expressed by the petitioner is not a ground to prosecute the petitioner by invoking Section 295-A or Section 504 of IPC, the Court said.
