Kara Sears
Blasphemy laws in India have been a controversial topic, with many calling for the repeal of the British-era laws that restrict freedom of speech and expression. Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, enacted in 1927, criminalizes blasphemy and has been used to prevent insults to religions practised in India, including Christianity and Islam. The law has been enforced in several cases, resulting in arrests and bans on books and plays. However, there are arguments against blasphemy laws, as they curtail the right to free speech and expression. The Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion to all citizens, with reasonable restrictions to maintain peace and harmony in a diverse society.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Blasphemy Law in India | Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code |
| Purpose | Prevent insulting Christianity, Islam and other religions practised in India |
| Requirements for Conviction | Defendant must have a "deliberate and malicious intention of outraging religious feelings" |
| Hate Speech Laws in India | Prohibited by several sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and other laws |
| Purpose of Hate Speech Laws | Prevent communal discord among India's diverse religious communities |
| Impact on Freedom of Expression | May stifle dissent and artistic freedom |
| Recent Cases | Writer Yogesh Master arrested over his novel Dhundi; later released on bail |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code
Section 295A states: "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." The key difference between Section 295A and English common law is that the defendant must have a "deliberate and malicious intention of outraging religious feelings" in the Indian code, whereas English common law had no such requirement.
Section 295A has been used on several occasions to curb free and honest discussions on religious issues and remains a threat to freedom of expression. For example, in 2011, a lawsuit was filed under Section 295A against the book "The Hindus: An Alternative History", and the book was subsequently withdrawn from the Indian market. In 1990, the Kerala government banned the play "Jesus Christ Superstar", and this ban was upheld by the Kerala High Court, which deemed the play "sacrilegious and blasphemous". In 2012, Maharashtra Police arrested Shaheen Dhada and Renu Srinivasan under Section 295A for hurting religious sentiments in a Facebook post, although the charges were later dropped.
There have been widespread calls in India from civil society to repeal Section 295A, along with other regressive British-era laws. However, the law has not been repealed and remains in effect.
University of Tennessee Law: Is It Worth the Effort?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Blasphemy law in art
India's blasphemy laws are covered by Articles 170 and 173 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860. These laws have been enforced in the country to arrest and prosecute several people. The laws aim to prevent discord among its many ethnic and religious communities. However, they have also been criticised for being regressive and impeding freedom of expression.
The Indian Penal Code's Section 295A, enacted in 1927 during British rule, is an example of a blasphemy law that remains in place today. It was introduced following the Rangila Rasul incident, which involved the publication of a book about the marriages and sex life of Muhammad. The law seeks to prevent hate speech that insults or attempts to insult the religion or religious beliefs of any citizen with the deliberate and malicious intention to outrage their religious feelings. It is important to note that the defendant must have this deliberate and malicious intention to outrage religious feelings, which is not a requirement in English common law.
The Indian Muslim community specifically demanded the enactment of Section 295A, as they believed that Section 153A did not adequately protect them from insults to their religious feelings. The Select Committee, before the enactment of Section 295A, acknowledged that a writer might insult a religion deliberately to provoke social reform, and thus recommended including the phrase "with deliberate and malicious intention" in the law.
The Indian government has banned various artistic works, including the play "Jesus Christ Superstar," citing blasphemy. In 1990, the Kerala government banned the play, and the Kerala High Court upheld this ban in 1991, deeming the script sacrilegious and blasphemous. However, in 2015, the Supreme Court of India quashed the ban, stating that it had outlived its utility.
In another instance, the Supreme Court set aside the West Bengal government's decision to forfeit all copies of the book "Dwikhandita" by Taslima Narseen in 2005. The book was initially banned due to outrage among the Muslim community, but the Supreme Court's intervention highlights the ongoing negotiation between freedom of expression and religious sentiments in India.
Faculty of Law, Delhi University: Location and More
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Hate speech laws
Section 295A was introduced to address "hate speech that insults or attempts to insult the religion or religious beliefs" of any citizen, with the intention of maintaining public order in a multi-religious and sensitive society. It punishes speech, writings, or signs that intentionally insult an individual's religion or beliefs with a fine or imprisonment of up to three years. The distinction between criticism and encouragement of prejudice or aggression towards a community because of their faith is crucial in interpreting hate speech laws.
The Indian Muslim community specifically advocated for Section 295A, as they felt that Section 153A did not adequately protect them from insults to their religious feelings. The law has been applied in several cases, including the banning of the play "Jesus Christ Superstar" in Kerala and the arrest of Shaheen Dhada and Renu Srinivasan for Facebook posts that allegedly hurt religious sentiments. However, the laws have also faced scrutiny for their potential to suppress dissent and press freedom and hinder free and honest discussions on religious issues.
While India has not abolished blasphemy laws, some countries with shared colonial histories have. For example, the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel were abolished in England and Wales in 2008. Other countries that have abolished or repealed blasphemy laws include France, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Iceland, Malta, Denmark, Canada, New Zealand, Greece, Ireland, Scotland, and Australia at the federal level.
In summary, hate speech laws in India aim to protect religious and ethnic minorities from disrespect and discrimination. Section 295A, enacted to address hate speech and blasphemy, has been used to curb insults or attempts to insult religion or religious beliefs. However, the laws have also faced scrutiny for their potential misuse and impact on freedom of expression.
Frank Catania's Law License: What Really Happened?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Arrests and bans
India's blasphemy laws have been enforced through arrests and bans. The country's hate speech laws aim to prevent discord among its diverse ethnic and religious communities. However, critics argue that these laws curtail freedom of speech and expression.
Arrests
In 2012, Maharashtra Police arrested Shaheen Dhada for criticising the total shutdown in the city for Bal Thackeray's funeral on Facebook. Her friend, Renu Srinivasan, was also arrested for liking the post. Although no religious issue was involved, they were charged under Section 295 (A) for hurting religious sentiments. The charges under this section were later dropped, and they were charged under Section 505 (2) of the Indian Penal Code, which pertains to statements creating enmity or hatred between classes.
Bangalore-based writer Yogesh Master was arrested in 2022 for his novel 'Dhundi', which included derogatory remarks about Ganesha. He was later released on bail.
Bans
In 1990, the Kerala government banned the play 'Jesus Christ Superstar'. In 1991, the Kerala High Court upheld the ban, stating that the script was against the fundamental beliefs of the Christian faith and that the portrayal of Jesus Christ was "both sacrilegious and blasphemous". However, in 2015, the Supreme Court of India quashed the ban, deeming it outdated.
In 2005, the West Bengal government ordered the forfeiture of all copies of the book 'Dwikhandita' by Taslima Narseen, citing outrage to the religious feelings of the Muslim community. In 2006, seven states banned the release of the Hollywood movie 'The Da Vinci Code' for similar reasons.
Calls for Reform
There have been widespread calls to repeal the blasphemy laws, which are seen as regressive remnants of British colonial rule. In 2005, Subramanian Swamy, a Member of Parliament, filed a petition to strike down the hate speech laws as unconstitutional. However, this effort faces significant obstacles due to the judiciary's previous upholding of the laws' constitutional validity.
Moral Laws: Universal or Not?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$12.61 $25.99
Religious sentiments and freedom of expression
India is a religiously diverse country with no state religion. The Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression to all its citizens. However, blasphemy laws in India, particularly Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, have been a controversial topic as they curtail one's right to free speech and expression.
Section 295A, enacted in 1927 during British rule, aims to prevent hate speech that insults or attempts to insult the religion or religious beliefs of any class of citizens with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging their religious feelings. The law has been used to maintain public order in a multireligious and religiously sensitive society. However, it has also been criticised for hindering free and honest discussions on religious issues and threatening freedom of expression. The police are authorised to arrest individuals without a warrant if they are accused of violating this section.
The Indian Supreme Court has upheld the validity of Section 295A, considering it a 'reasonable restriction' on freedom of speech in the interest of maintaining public order. The court clarified that the section only applies to intentional and malicious insults that pose a potential threat to public harmony. Nevertheless, civil society organisations in India have called for the repeal of this British-era law.
Several instances of blasphemy charges and arrests in India have sparked debates about the balance between religious sentiments and freedom of expression. For example, in 2012, Shaheen Dhada and Renu Srinivasan were arrested under Section 295A for Facebook posts that were deemed to hurt religious sentiments, although the charges were later dropped. In another case, writer Yogesh Master was arrested for derogatory remarks about Ganesha in his novel "Dhundi". Additionally, various books, plays, and movies have been banned or forfeited in India due to blasphemous content or hurting religious sentiments.
While blasphemy laws aim to protect religious sentiments and maintain social harmony, they must be applied carefully to avoid infringing upon individuals' right to freedom of expression. The Indian Supreme Court has emphasised that restrictions on free speech should be narrowly curated to criminalise only incitement to imminent lawless action rather than mere advocacy.
The Evolution of Universal Traffic Laws: A Historical Perspective
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
It is difficult to determine how often blasphemy laws are implemented in India, but there are several notable cases where individuals have been arrested or prosecuted under these laws.
Blasphemy laws in India criminalize any act or speech that insults or shows contempt for religion, religious beliefs, or sacred objects. These laws were first introduced during British rule in 1860 and have been retained in the Indian Penal Code, particularly Section 295A.
Punishments for blasphemy can include imprisonment, fines, or both. The length of imprisonment can vary, with some laws prescribing up to three years, while others allow for up to ten years in jail.
There have been widespread calls for the repeal of blasphemy laws, which are seen as regressive and curtailing freedom of speech. However, the judiciary has upheld the constitutional validity of these laws, and removing them would require a significant shift in the legal system.
