The Supreme Court has ruled that calling someone “Pakistani” or “miyan-tiyan” does not legally amount to hurting religious sentiments, although such remarks are certainly in poor taste.
The court dismissed a criminal case against 80-year-old Hari Nandan Singh, who had used these terms during an argument with a government employee in Jharkhand.
“The appellant is accused of offending the religious sentiments of the complainant by referring to him as ‘miyan-tiyan’ and ‘Pakistani.’ While these statements are undoubtedly inappropriate, they do not constitute an offense under the law for hurting religious sentiments. Therefore, we believe the appellant should be discharged from the charges under IPC Section 298, which criminalizes intentional insults to religious beliefs,” observed a bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma.
The judgment did not mention the complainant’s name.
Additionally, the court ruled that Singh was not guilty of assault or using criminal force against a public servant. “There is no evidence of any physical assault or force that would justify charges under Section 353 of the IPC,” the court stated.
The bench further noted that Singh could not be charged under IPC Section 504, which deals with provocation leading to a breach of peace. “There was no act on the appellant’s part that could have incited violence or disorder,” it added.
Singh had appealed to the Supreme Court after both a sessions court and the Jharkhand High Court declined to dismiss the charges against him.
Setting aside the high court’s decision, the Supreme Court ruled in Singh’s favor, stating: “We overturn the high court’s order, which upheld the trial court’s ruling, and consequently allow the appellant’s plea, discharging him from all three charges filed against him.”
The case originated from a complaint filed by a government employee working as an Urdu translator and acting clerk for Right to Information (RTI) matters at the sub-divisional office in Chas, Bokaro. The complainant alleged that Singh verbally abused and mistreated him when he visited Singh’s residence to deliver a response to an RTI query. According to the complaint, Singh refused to accept the document, insulted him, and behaved aggressively, prompting the employee to file an FIR at the Bokaro Sector-IV police station.
While delivering the verdict in Singh’s favor, the Supreme Court pointed out that the allegations in the FIR did not support the charges against him.
Justice Nagarathna, who authored the judgment, referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sajjan Kumar vs. CBI (2010), which emphasized that trial courts must not act as mere “post offices” for the prosecution. Instead, they must analyze the overall evidence, the broader context of the case, and the documents submitted before making a decision