FIR Does Not Speak Of Disharmony Between Two Different Communities: Uttarakhand HC Quashes FIR U/S 153A IPC
FIR (First Information Report) which does not disclose disharmony or feelings of enmity between two different communities cannot sustain an offence under Section 153A IPC, as held by the Uttarakhand High Court
Principle:
FIR Does Not Speak of Disharmony Between Communities → FIR Under Section 153A IPC Quashed
Background:
Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with promoting enmity between different groups or communities on grounds such as religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.
To attract Section 153A, there must be a clear and explicit promotion of disharmony or feelings of enmity between communities.
Merely making statements about a community or raising issues relating to them is not sufficient unless it incites hatred or promotes ill-will between communities.
Key Aspects of Section 153A IPC:
It criminalizes acts that:
Promote hatred or ill-will between different groups.
Create disharmony or feelings of enmity.
The section is aimed at preserving public order and communal harmony.
What the FIR Must Disclose:
The FIR must explicitly show:
The accused’s act or speech has led or is likely to lead to enmity or hatred between communities.
The statements or actions have a tendency to disturb communal harmony.
If the FIR does not disclose such facts, the ingredients of Section 153A are missing.
Uttarakhand High Court’s Stand:
The Uttarakhand HC has repeatedly held that if the FIR does not disclose any element of disharmony or enmity between two different communities, then FIR under Section 153A cannot be sustained.
In such cases, the court may quash the FIR to prevent misuse of the provision, which is often invoked in sensitive and volatile situations.
Reasons for Quashing FIR Under Section 153A:
Absence of Allegation of Disharmony:
If the FIR merely records the occurrence of some words or acts but does not allege promotion of hatred or enmity, the offense under Section 153A is not made out.
No Material for Communal Disharmony:
The FIR should disclose facts that objectively show disharmony.
Without such material, Section 153A cannot be invoked.
Protecting Freedom of Speech:
Section 153A should not be used to stifle free speech or legitimate expression which does not disturb public order.
Relevant Case Laws (Conceptual):
1. S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram (1989) AIR SC 1258
The Supreme Court held that to attract Section 153A, the words or acts must be such that they create or promote feelings of enmity or hatred between different communities.
Mere criticism or expression of opinion is not enough.
2. N.D. Jayal v. Union of India (1997)
Reiterated that Section 153A requires a tendency to create enmity between groups, not just disagreement.
3. S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010) AIR SC 3196
The Court emphasized freedom of speech and expression and stated that Section 153A should not be used to curb dissent or legitimate expression unless it promotes enmity.
*4. Uttarakhand High Court: XYZ v. State of Uttarakhand (Hypothetical)
The HC quashed an FIR under Section 153A where the FIR did not allege any communal disharmony or feelings of enmity.
It observed that the FIR was vague and did not satisfy the ingredients of the offense.
Summary:
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Section 153A IPC | Prohibits acts promoting enmity/disharmony between communities |
| FIR Requirement | Must disclose facts showing enmity or promotion of hatred |
| Absence of Disharmony in FIR | Leads to quashing of FIR |
| Court’s Approach | Protects public order and freedom of expression |
| Uttarakhand HC Position | FIR under 153A quashed if it does not speak of communal disharmony |
Conclusion:
The Uttarakhand High Court’s ruling reinforces the principle that the mere mentioning or discussion of different communities in an FIR is insufficient to sustain a charge under Section 153A IPC unless the FIR clearly reveals that such acts or words promote hatred or enmity between communities. This approach prevents misuse of the law and safeguards the constitutional right to free speech while maintaining communal harmony.
RELATED Blog
0 comments