Indore, July 8 A controversial case surrounding a satirical cartoon took a serious turn as the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Indore denied anticipatory bail to the accused, Hemant Malviya.
The order, issued on July 3, 2025, by a single bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar, pertains to a caricature posted on Malviya's Facebook page, which allegedly depicted the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Prime Minister Narendra Modi in an undignified and offensive manner.
The court adopted a stern stance, stating that such content has the potential to disrupt social harmony and that Malviya's arrest was justified under Section 41(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The bench also declined to extend the protection offered by the Supreme Court's ruling in the Arnesh Kumar case, determining that the circumstances did not merit leniency.
The court observed that Malviya had "clearly overstepped the threshold of freedom of speech and expression".
The caricature, showing a RSS figure with khaki shorts pulled down and the Prime Minister administering an injection to the exposed figure, was accompanied by a provocative caption referencing "derogatory lines involving Lord Shiva" and the "caste census".
The court found that the content, along with Malviya's endorsement and his invitation for others to modify and share the cartoon, was not in good taste and constituted a deliberate act meant to outrage religious sentiments.
The Lasudia police station in Indore, registered a case against Malviya for offences punishable under Sections 196, 299, 302, 352, and 353(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
The prosecution, represented by the State and an objector linked to the RSS, argued that the cartoon was a repeated attempt by the applicant to malign the image of the RSS and disturb social harmony.
The High Court concurred, emphasising that the freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution does not extend to deliberate acts that insult religion or promote discord.
Citing the need for custodial interrogation, the court held that Malviya's actions demonstrated a propensity to repeat such offences and thus denied relief under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code and its updated equivalent in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Earlier judicial precedents cited by Malviya's counsel, including decisions from the Supreme Court and Kerala High Court, were found "distinguishable" and "inapplicable" to the present case.
The court concluded that the caricature, along with Malviya's public endorsement, crossed the bounds of lawful satire and warranted serious legal consequences.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor