J&K High Court Stays Proceedings In Criminal Case Against Jitendra Tyagi For Derogatory Remarks Against Islam, Prophet Mohammad

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that the trial court erred in taking the cognizance against petitioner under sections 153-A, 295-A & 505(1) of IPC by-passing the required sanction from central government as provided under section 196 of Cr.PC.

The court was hearing a writ petition filed by petitioner seeking quashment of the very entertainment of a criminal complaint filed by the respondent and the order taking cognizance by the court of Judicial Magistrate.

A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti observed that trial court has lached on to take cognizance of the complaint of the respondent without bothering to have even an elementary reading of section 196 of the Cr.PC which mandates previous sanction of the Central Government or of the State Government for facilitating cognizance of an offence under sections 153-A, 295-A & 505(1) of the IPC.

The court said that there is a legislative purpose for the requiring sanction from the concerned appropriate government so as to set a safe reference in the institution of the criminal complaint alleging offences under above sections.

The court also noted that from the tenor of the complaint it appeared that the complainant did not intend to file complaint for seeking cognizance by the court but rather had asked for the direction for filing of the FIR.

The court added that above was clearly seen by the averments made by the complainant in the said complaint in which he pleaded that he had previously eent to the police station for lodging of the FIR but same was not registered.

It said that magistrate while acting suo moto initiated an enquiry purportedly ascertaining the truthfulness or otherwise of the matter in hand and asked the complainant to produce all the evidence after which it came to conclusion that prime facie case was made out.

The counsel for petitioner argued that the learned magistrate has taken cognizance of the matter in sheer ignorance of the Cr.PC which required previous sanction before taking cognizance.

The court therefore issued notice to the respondent and in the mean while stayed the proceedings before the magistrate court.

BACKGROUND:

Respondent No. 2 filed a criminal complaint against the petitioner, alleging that after converting from Islam to Hinduism, the petitioner made statements that were derogatory towards Islam as a religion and also disrespected its holy scripture, the Quran.

In the complaint respondent described the specific manner in which the petitioner allegedly portrayed Islam and Prophet Muhammad in an offensive way.

The complaint further claims that the petitioner's remarks, which were made public through newspapers and news channels, drew strong objections and condemnation from various Islamic scholars and Muslim organizations across India.

In this context, Respondent No. 2 alleged that the petitioner's actions make him liable to be prosecuted under Sections 153-A, 295-A, 298, 504, and 505 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

APPEARANCE

Ankur Sharma, Advocate For Petitioner

Case-Title: Jitendra Narayan Tyagi @ Syed Waseem Rizvi vs UT of J&K 

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 172

Click Here To Read/Download Order