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