The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed a case against students and faculty members of the Jain Centre for Management Studies (Deemed University), who had been booked for staging a skit that allegedly contained derogatory references to Dr. B. R. Ambedkar and the Dalit community.
In a ruling by Justice S. R. Krishna Kumar, the court upheld the petitions filed by Dinesh Nilkant Borkar and others, leading to the quashing of the prosecution against them. The court's decision brings an end to the legal proceedings that had drawn considerable public and legal scrutiny.
It said, “The skit/short play performed by the petitioner was in the nature of satire/entertainment, which is constitutionally protected under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression and the impugned FIR clearly does not meet or satisfy the basic ingredients of the offences alleged against the petitioner.”
The University had organized the Jain University Youth Fest-2023 at the NIMHANS Convention Centre, where students participated in various cultural and artistic performances. Among these, the petitioners—who were students of the university—presented a skit or short play as part of the event. The performance, along with other activities at the festival, was intended to showcase the creative and theatrical talents of the participants.
The police had filed a case invoking Sections 153-A, 149, and 295-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), and 3(1)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
On going through the records the bench said, “The impugned FIR has not been lodged by a person who is the member of the SC/ST community and there is no material to indicate that the petitioners had any specific intention to insult or intimidate with an intent to humiliate a member of SC/ST community in any place within a public view.”
The Court perused the complaint, FIR as well as the transcript of the short play/skit, and said that it was sufficient to "come to the conclusion that the necessary ingredients constituting the offences are conspicuously absent, especially when the said skit/short play was done for mere/sheer entertainment purposes and not with any intention to harm or humiliate any community or race nor make any reference to a particular religion or religious belief.”
The bench referred to decisions of the Apex Court and HC and held “I am of the view that continuation of the impugned proceedings against the petitioners would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference by this Court in the present petition.”
info@adhwaitha.com
