BLASPHEMY LAWS IN INDIA

This Article is written by R. Jeeva Dharshini from VIT University, Chennai.

INTRODUCTION

All human rights are universal, inseparable and interdependent. However, there is no clear indication that such interdependence depends more on the freedom of speech and incitement of racial or religious hatred. Blasphemy is one of the world’s most abused law when it comes to suppressing the voices of minorities, rationalists and so on. However, the concept of declaring blasphemy as a crime does not apply to ordinary legal countries but to the rest of the world. These laws are commonly used to persecute people for beliefs around the world and that activities do not conform to majority opinion on religious and sensitive areas and to suppress criticism of religion. However, there is a huge difference between criticism and blasphemy. Many countries across the world have blasphemy laws in their penal system despite having different legal systems.

HISTORY

The idea of ​​blasphemy originated in Greece in AD 325. About the 12th or 13th century, the Jews provided a straightforward structure for blasphemy. With most Hindu population, there was no separate legislation in India against blasphemy till the year 1927.Prior to independence, a pamphlet was published by Mahashay Rajpal named Rangila Rasul. On its release in the year 1926, it sparked controversy, with Muslim community as it was against their religious sentiments. Eventually Rajpal was acquitted as there was no strong blasphemy law in India. As a result, in the year 1927, the British colonial government amended the Indian Penal Code ,1860 thus added the section 295(A). This section is present even after the partition of India in Indian Penal Code 1860 and also in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Though India and Pakistan followed the same criminal justice system, but Pakistan amended in the year 1980 to 1986 and included blasphemy as a penal offence.

BLASPHEMY LAWS IN INDIA

Right to the religion of individuals to practice, profess and propagate not only religion but multifarious denominations thereof is embodied into the constitution of India. Same provisions also put reasonable restrictions on the state and the individual, as the exercise of the same rights should not be against public order, morality and national security of the country. To protect the rights of one individual against the other, Chapter XV was added to Indian penal code in 1927 as ‘offences relating to religion’. These are the blasphemy laws of India. This covers the following sections:

Section 153 A of IPC

The purpose of Section 153 A is to punish persons who indulge in attack on religion, race, place of birth, place of residence, language or of any particular group or class or founders and prophets of religion which promotes enmity amo0ng them. The offense should be a tangible offense and the same penalty can be extended up to three years, either fined, or both. However, the punishment for a crime committed in a place of worship is increased up to five years and is liable for a fine.

Section 154 of IPC

This section prohibits the incitement of hatred in name of religion but it doesn’t protect any religion rather the rights of the individual to practice their religion.

Section 295 of IPC

If any person intentionally damages any religious objects that is deemed to be sacred by followers of any religion in India, other than idols and books, then they are punishable under this particular section with imprisonment up to two years or fine or both.

Section 295 A of IPC

If a person maliciously by words spoken or written or signs or by visible representation insults or attempts to insult religious sentiments of any class of citizens of India then he may be punished under this section. A person can be imprisoned for 3 years or fined, or both under this section.

Section 296 of IPC

If a person causes disturbance intentionally to any lawful religious assembly or ceremonies, then he shall be punished under this section of imprisonment up to one year or fine or both.

Section 297 of IPC

If a person intentionally trespasses any burial place knowing that his act may cause hurt to the religious sentiments of any class of citizens is punished with imprisonment up to one year or fine or both under this section. This section is meant to protect the religious rights of dead persons.

BLASPHEMY LAWS AND THE CONSTITUTION

Blasphemy is an uncommon term in the realm of the Indian Constitution, as the Indian court has long emphasized the nature of the inclusion of Hinduism, making the concept of blasphemy inconsistent.

Analysis

Ramji Lal Modi V State of UP,1957

In this case, the court held that Section 295A was constitutionally valid in accordance with Article 19(2) of the Constitution, it was a reasonable restriction upon Freedom of speech, in the interest of the public order. It was also said that Sec 295A only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion with malicious intention of outraging the religious feeling of that class. The calculated tendency of this most aggravated form of insult is to disrupt the public order and the section which penalises such activities is well within the protection of Article 19(2) as being a law with reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

Shreya Singhal V Union of India

The Supreme Court held that only “incitement” violence could be prohibited under the public order, and even advocacy was allowed.

BLASPHEMY LAW: ANTIETHICAL TO INDIA’S SECULAR ETHOS

Section295(A) of the Indian Penal Code, violates the secular character of the Constitution. Blasphemy means, “speaking evil of sacred things”. In India, which is a secular state, there can be no law of blasphemy as such. Thus, in modern states, religious offences aim to uphold law and order rather God or faith. Section 295A was enacted to make malicious acts insulting the religious sentiments, or outraging the religious feelings, punishable as offences relating to religion whether or not they amount to attempts to promote feelings of enmity between classes as contained under section 153A of IPC (Sarvaria 2003). Our Constitution recognized the constitutional right of freedom of conscience of atheists and non-believers.

St Xavier’s College v State of Gujrat- The court in this case held that “secularism is not anti-God or pro-God, it treats alike the devout, the agnostic and the atheist.” The rights of atheists to their freedom of conscience also extend to the right to propagate their ideas. However, the interpretation of Section 295A in a socio-political context, with its wider scope, directly undermines this constitutional right.

Ram Ji Lal Modi v The State of UP (1957) – In this case, the constitutionality of the provision was challenged before the Honourable Court. The Supreme Court while holding the provision to be constitutional provided that only those insults which are taken up with deliberate and malicious intentions are covered under the section and not every insult to religion is covered under the said section. The Court thereby upheld the restriction on freedom of speech and expression and held that the provision has been created in favour of public order. However, the Court completely failed to appreciate on the point that not every insult of religion would necessarily lead to a law-and-order situation.

CONCLUSION

There is no doubt that blasphemy laws limit an individual’s right of freedom of speech and expression, but the issue is whether it is reasonable or not. To maintain peace and tranquillity it is the prime objective of ever individual and not to threaten the minorities and people of other religion. Laws should be made to punish people who makes derogatory comments over religious aims and sentiments of others. This allows the citizens to respect their right to express their thoughts and right to speech. When the society will be educated it will see this as a mooting problem and not as derogation to the religion.

REFERENCES

[Diganth Raj Sehgal], [Blasphemy laws in India and the contemporary world],[ipleaders],[1], [November 22, 2020]

[Gautam Bhatia ],[‘Blasphemy law’ and the Constitution],[ livemint] ,[1],[ 19 March,2016]

[Surbhi Karwa ,Shubham Kumar],[A Blasphemy Law is Antithetical to India’s Secular Ethos], [Vol. 54, Issue No. 37 ],[EPW Engage],[1], [14 September, 2019]

Ramji Lal Modi V State of UP 1957 AIR 620, 1957 SCR 860.

Shreya Singhal V Union of India AIR 2015 SC 1523.

St Xavier’s College v State of Gujrat, 1974 AIR 1389

This article is edited by Kavana Rao.