Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has quashed a complaint against singer Kailash Kher for allegedly hurting religious sentiments with a song on Lord Shiva, observing that intolerance and dissent from orthodoxy have long plagued Indian society.
The court quoted author A.G. Noorani, stating, “Intolerance of dissent from the orthodoxy of the day has been the bane of Indian society for centuries. But it is precisely in the ready acceptance of the right to dissent as distinct from its mere tolerance, that a free society distinguishes itself.”
A bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Shyam Chandak ruled on Wednesday that there was no deliberate or malicious intent on Kher’s part to offend religious sentiments. The complaint was filed by Narinder Makkar before a Ludhiana court, seeking action under IPC Sections 295A and 298, which pertain to outraging religious feelings with deliberate and malicious intent. Makkar, a Shiva worshipper, alleged that Kher’s song Babam Bam featured a vulgar video with scantily dressed women and scenes of people kissing, which hurt his religious sentiments.
The HC, while quashing the complaint before the Ilaka judicial magistrate, noted that the song’s lyrics were purely in praise of Lord Shiva and highlighted his powerful persona.
The court emphasised that merely disliking an act does not necessarily mean it outrages religious sentiments. “Every action which may be to the dislike of a class of people may not necessarily lead to outraging religious sentiments,” it stated.
The court clarified that to invoke Section 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens), there must be a deliberate attempt to insult religious beliefs. The only accusation against Kher was that he appeared in a video with scantily dressed women, which the complainant found vulgar.
However, the HC ruled that this did not constitute an offence, as there was no “deliberate and malicious intention on his part, who is just singing the song.”
Kher had moved the Bombay High Court in 2014, seeking relief after the complaint was filed in Punjab. The HC had then granted interim protection, directing that no coercive action be taken against him.
In his plea, filed through advocate Ashok Sarogi, Kher contended that he was merely the singer of the song and had no involvement in the video’s choreography, which was produced by another company under Sony Music Entertainment. Sarogi further argued that the video was released only after receiving clearance from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
