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 signs or by visible representations or otherwise insults or attempts to insult the religion or the 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.
IPC Section 295A: Simplified Explanation
IPC Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code specifically addresses the offence of deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings by insulting the religion or spiritual beliefs of any class. This section was added to cater to situations where actions go beyond mere injury or defilement of places of worship (as covered under Section 295) and directly target the religious sentiments of individuals or groups.
The key elements of this offence include:
· Deliberate and Malicious Intent: The person must act with a clear intention to insult a class’s religion or religious beliefs.
· Outrage Religious Feelings: The act must be capable of outraging the religious feelings of that class.
· Insulting Religion or Beliefs: The nature of the act should be insulting to the religion or the religious beliefs.
This section is crucial in maintaining communal harmony and protecting the dignity of all religious groups against targeted hate and disrespect.
Is IPC Section 295A Bailable?
IPC Section 295A is a non-bailable offence. Individuals accused under this section must appear before a court to seek bail, as it is not granted automatically. The discretion lies with the judicial authority based on the case’s specifics.
IPC Section 295A Punishment
The Punishment for an offence under IPC Section 295A can be severe, reflecting the seriousness with which the law views attempts to disturb religious harmony. The convicted individual can face imprisonment of up to three years, a fine, or both. The actual sentence is determined by considering factors such as the nature of the act, its impact on the community, and any previous history of similar offences.
Example of IPC Section 295A
A notable example of the application of IPC Section 295A is the case involving the arrest of comedian Kiku Sharda in 2016. Sharda was accused of mimicking a religious leader in a way that allegedly hurt the religious sentiments of the followers of that leader. This case sparked widespread debate over the balance between freedom of expression and respect for religious sentiments. Sharda was later released on bail, but the incident remains a reference point in discussions about the scope and application of IPC Section 295A.
