The Kerala High Court while hearing a plea for anticipatory bail in case of hate speech granted the relief sought by the appellant after holding that nothing was done by the accused to promote hatred between the two religious groups.
Factual Background
The prosecution alleged that all 4 accused, who were part of an organization named ‘Hindu Aikyawadi’, with malignant intent to spread hatred and promote enmity between two religious groups provoked the complainant who ran a bakery and threatened him to remove the “Halal Food” sticker from their products and further warned them that if same was not done within 7 days, they will boycott the bakery and hold protests against them. On the basis of the aforesaid ordeal the owner of the bakery filed a complaint against the accused and an FIR was registered against them under section 153 and 506 read with section 34 of the IPC.
The applicants submitted that the crime was registered at the instance of political parties like CPM and SDPI and apprehended that non-bailable sections 153A and 295A could also be incorporated with intention to incarcerate them due to which they moved to the High Court seeking Anticipatory bail.
The Court’s Decision
The single judge bench of Justice Ashok Menon observed that even though non-bailable sections 153A and 295A were not incorporated in the FIR, considering the contents of the said report, it was possible that the aforementioned sections might be added subsequently. The Court perused the non-bailable sections and relating them to the present case remarked “A reading of the F.I.R does not indicate such an act on the part of the applicants. Nothing was done by them to promote hatred between two groups.” The Court further noted that the complainants had no objections in granting anticipatory bail to the accused and the complainant had also removed the “Halal” sticker from their products.
The Court found that even though non-bailable sections were not incorporated in the FIR, there was a possibility of incorporation of such additional charges and the apprehension of arrest by the accused was reasonable. Thus, making the aforementioned observations, the Court allowed the application and granted anticipatory bail to the applicants.
Read Order @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
