Cecily Zamora
India is the world's second most populous country, with a unique socio-cultural diversity. While the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of conscience and the free profession, practice, and propagation of religion to all citizens, blasphemy laws in the country have been a topic of debate. Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, enacted in 1927 by the British Parliament, criminalizes blasphemy and has been used to prevent insulting religions practised in India. However, this law conflicts with the right to freedom of speech and expression, leading to calls for its repeal. While some argue for the protection of religious sentiments, others criticize the law's impact on freedom of expression and its potential misuse to suppress dissent.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Section of Indian Penal Code dealing with blasphemy | 295A |
| Year of enactment | 1927 |
| Enacted by | British Parliament |
| Maximum penalty | Two years' imprisonment, a fine, or both |
| Nature of offence | Cognisable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable |
| Recent cases | Nupur Sharma, Mohammed Zubair |
| Other relevant sections | 153A, 153, 67 of the IT Act, 66 (a) of the Information Technology Act 2000, 505 (2) |
Explore related products
![Cohen's Handbook of Federal Indian Law 2024 Edition [LATEST EDITION]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51TBGHm3VUL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
What You'll Learn
The history of blasphemy laws in India
The Indian Penal Code was enacted during British rule, and Section 295(A), specifically concerning blasphemy, was enacted in 1927 by the British Parliament. This law was influenced by the Muslim community's demands for a law against insult to religious feelings following the publication of the book 'Rangila Rasul' in 1924, which concerned the marriages and sex life of Muhammad. The publisher was arrested but later acquitted as there was no law against insult to religion at the time. Section 295(A) was thus enacted to punish persons who attack other religions or their religious figures with deliberate and malicious intent.
Since independence, India has maintained its secular state status, and blasphemy laws continue to protect all religions and denominations. These laws have been invoked in various cases, including against the play 'Jesus Christ Superstar' banned in Kerala in 1990, and the book 'The Hindus: An Alternative History' in 2011. In recent times, there have been calls for the repeal or toning down of blasphemy laws in India, with arguments that they impede freedom of speech and expression.
Law Minors: University Options and Opportunities
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code
India prohibits hate speech through various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and other laws that restrict freedom of expression. Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is one such law that addresses hate speech and blasphemy.
Section 295A of the IPC, enacted in 1927 by the British Parliament, addresses deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs. It is a cognisable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable offence. The section was added to the penal code in response to the Rangeela Rasool incident, where a Hindu editor was fatally stabbed by a Muslim after being acquitted due to the absence of a law against insulting religion. The purpose of Section 295A is to punish those who engage in wanton vilification or attacks on other religions or their religious figures. It is intended to protect religious minorities and prohibit incitement against them.
The application of Section 295A has been controversial. In 2022, Nupur Sharma, a spokeswoman for India's ruling party, made controversial remarks about the Islamic prophet Muhammad, leading to her being booked under Section 295A. In another instance, a lawsuit was filed under Section 295A against the book "The Hindus: An Alternative History," resulting in its withdrawal from the Indian market. Civil society in India has called for the repeal of this British-era code, arguing that it restricts free and honest discussions on religious issues and poses a threat to freedom of expression.
Legal experts consider Section 295A controversial and believe there are strong legal arguments for revisiting and potentially overruling the constitution bench judgement in Ramji Lal Modi v. State of UP. The section has been criticised for being used to curb free expression and for its potential to stifle social reform.
Saul's Law License: The Cost of Unethical Practices
You may want to see also
Explore related products
![American Indian Tribal Law: [Connected eBook] (Aspen Coursebook Series)](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81KetKmayRL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
Hate speech laws in India
India prohibits hate speech through several sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and other laws that limit freedom of expression. The hate speech laws in India aim to prevent discord among its many ethnic and religious communities.
Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code prohibits citizens from creating disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred, or ill will between different groups of people. The Supreme Court of India has also directed the Central and State governments to take strong action against people who make hate speeches, especially those targeting Muslims.
Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code is a controversial provision that deals with deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs. It is one of the hate speech laws in India and prohibits blasphemy against all religions in India. This law has been used to prevent insulting Christianity, Islam, and other religions practised in India.
The context of speech is crucial in determining whether it constitutes hate speech. Hate speech can cause harm to targeted individuals and groups, as well as to society at large, by inciting hatred, violence, discrimination, and intolerance. A recent analysis revealed that a concerning number of lawmakers in India (a total of 107 Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly) have hate speech cases registered against them.
St Andrews University: Law Degrees and More
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Calls to repeal blasphemy laws
India is the world's second most populous country with 138 crore people and a unique sociocultural diversity. While the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of conscience and the free profession, practice, and propagation of religion to all citizens, blasphemy laws in the country have been a controversial topic.
Several people have called for the repeal of blasphemy laws in India, citing reasons such as the need for all religions to be open to criticism in a modern country. They argue that blasphemy laws are barbaric and hinder the path toward a more open-minded and less dogmatic society. Some also believe that repealing these laws will help reduce extremism in communities prone to it.
In 2005, Subramanian Swamy, a Member of Parliament in Rajya Sabha, filed a petition demanding the striking down of hate speech laws in the Indian Penal Code as unconstitutional. However, this faced an obstacle as the judiciary upheld the constitutional validity of Section 295A in the case of Ramji Lal Modi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1957. Legal experts consider Section 295A controversial, and there are good legal arguments for revisiting and potentially overruling the previous judgement.
Section 295A, enacted in 1927 by the British Parliament, is a cognisable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable offence. It has been used multiple times to prevent free and honest discussions on religious issues and poses a threat to freedom of expression. The law requires the defendant to have a “deliberate and malicious intention of outraging religious feelings," which is not a requirement in English common law.
In July 2022, Alt News, an Indian fact-checking site's co-founder, Mohammed Zubair, was arrested by Delhi Police for allegedly "hurting religious sentiments." This further fueled the debate around blasphemy laws in India.
Phaedra Parks' Law License: What Happened?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Blasphemy law prosecutions
India's secular constitution is under threat from rising Hindu nationalism and inter-religious tension. British-era blasphemy laws are still in place in India and are increasingly being used and cited. Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code is a controversial provision that prohibits blasphemy against all religions in India. It is a cognisable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable offence.
Section 295A states that any deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs are punishable by up to two years in prison, a fine, or both. The law has been used to prevent free and honest discussions on religious issues and has been criticised as a threat to freedom of expression. It was enacted in 1927 by the British Parliament in response to the publication of a book, 'Rangila Rasul', which concerned the marriages and sex life of Muhammad. The publisher was arrested but later acquitted because there was no law against insulting religion at the time. This incident led to the enactment of Section 295A to address the demands of the Indian Muslim community for a law against insulting religious feelings.
In 2022, Nupur Sharma, a spokeswoman for India's ruling party, made controversial remarks about the Islamic prophet Muhammad, leading to her being booked under Section 295A, among other charges. In the same year, Mohammed Zubair, an Indian fact-checking site co-founder, was arrested by Delhi Police for allegedly "hurting religious sentiments" under Section 295A. Other notable cases include that of Sanal Edamaruku, who was charged under Section 295 by the Catholic Church for exposing a supposed "miracle" as a leaky drain, forcing him into exile in Finland.
In addition to prosecutions, India's blasphemy laws also impact the availability of certain media. Many books are banned for blasphemous content, and in 2011, the Indian Ministry of Communications and Information Technology issued rules requiring social media operators to remove blasphemous content within 36 hours of a complaint.
Bath University: Law Degrees and More
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Yes, blasphemy is criminalized by Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, enacted in 1927 by the British Parliament. It is considered a hate speech law in India.
Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code states that any deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs are punishable by up to three years' imprisonment, a fine, or both.
Yes, blasphemy laws in India are controversial as they conflict with the right to freedom of speech and expression granted by Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. There have been widespread calls to repeal these laws, with critics arguing that they suppress dissent and press freedom.
