http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

PETITIONER: BABU RAO PATEL

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF DELHI

DATE OF JUDGMENT21/02/1980

BENCH: REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J) BENCH: REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J) SARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH

CITATION:  1980 AIR  763            1980 SCR  (2)1082  1980 SCC  (2) 402

ACT:      Penal Code, Section 153A(1), Scope of-Whether political thesis or  historical truth  so presented be said to promote feelings of  enmity, hatred  or ill-will  between  different religious  groups  or  communities  so  as  to  attract  the provisions of Section 153A of the Code.

HEADNOTE:      Dismissing the appeals, by special leave the Court, ^      HELD: Section  153A(1) is not confined to the promotion of feelings  of enmity etc. on grounds of religion only, but takes in promotion of such feelings on other grounds as well such as  race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community. [1083G]      In the  instance case:  Both the  articles  do  promote feelings of  enmity, hatred  and ill-will  between the Hindu and Muslim communities. [1086C]           (i)|The first article "A tale of two Communalisms" is not  even thinly  veiled as  a political thesis; it is an undisguised attempt  to promote  feelings of  enmity, hatred and ill-will  between the  Hindu and the Muslim communities. It is  designed to  fan the sparks of ill-will and hatred on ground of  community. The  reference to  the alleged  Muslim tradition of rape, loot, violence and murder and the alleged terror struck  into  the  hearts  of  Hindu  minority  in  a neighbouring country  by periodical killings, in the context of his  thesis that  communalism  is  the  instrument  of  a militant minority can lead to no other inference. [1084E-F]           (ii)|The second  article  ’Lingering  disgrace  of history’ goes further and is calculated to rouse feelings of enmity, hatred  and ill-will  between Muslims and Hindus. It was wrong to present the Moghuls as the ancestors of today’s Muslims and  to willify the Muslims as the proud discendants of the "foul" Moghuls. [1084G, 1086A, B, C]      Feelings  of   enmity,  hatred   or  ill-will   between different religious groups or communities cannot be promoted in the  guise  of  political  thesis  of  historical  truth. [1086C]

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

JUDGMENT:      CRIMINAL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Criminal  Appeal Nos. 237-238 of 1974.      Appeal by  special leave  from the  Judgment and  Order dated 14-8-1973  of the  Delhi High  Court in  Crl. Revision Nos. 146 and 153 of 1971.      A. K.  Sen, Gobind  Das, A. N. Karkhanis, Sridharan and Mrs. S. Bhandare for the Appellant.      H. S. Marwah and M. N. Shroff for the Respondent. 1083      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      CHINNAPPA REDDY,  J. Can political thesis or historical truth be  so presented  as to  promote feelings  of  enmity, hatred or  ill-will between  different religious  groups  or communities, is  the question  which we  are called  upon to answer in  these two  criminal appeals. The appellant in the two criminal appeals is the editor, publisher and printer of a monthly  magazine going  by the  name ’Mother  India’.  He wrote two  articles  under  the  captions  "A  tale  of  two communalisms"  and   "Lingering  disgrace  of  history".  On complaints filed  by the  Superintendent of  Police,  Delhi, under section  153-A  of  the  Indian  Penal  Code,  he  was convicted in  respect of  each of these articles in separate cases  and   sentenced  in   each  case   to  suffer  simple imprisonment for  a period  of four months and to pay a fine of Rs.  1000/- by  the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Delhi.  On   appeal  the   learned  Sessions  Judge,  Delhi, confirmed the  conviction in  both the cases but reduced the sentence of  fine to  Rs.  500/-  in  each  case.  This  was confirmed by  the High  Court. The  appellant has  preferred these appeals by Special Leave of this Court.      Shri A.  K. Sen,  learned  counsel  for  the  appellant submitted that if the articles were read as a whole it would be patent  that the article "A tale of two communalisms" was no more  than a  political thesis  and  the  second  article "Lingering disgrace  of history"  was no more than a protest based on  historical truths  against the  naming of roads in Delhi after  Moghul  emperors.  He  contended  that  neither article contained any attack on any religion and, therefore, there was no question of promoting and attempting to promote feelings of  enmity, hatred  or ill-will  between  different religious groups  on grounds  or religion.  The  convictions under section 153-A were, therefore, wrong, he submitted.      Section  153-A(1)  (a)  provides,  "whoever  by  words, either  spoken  or  written,  or  by  signs  or  by  visible representations  or  otherwise,  promotes,  or  attempts  to promote, on  grounds of  religion,  race,  place  of  birth, residence, language,  caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony  or feelings  of enmity,  hatred,  or ill-will between  different religious,  racial  language  or regional groups  or castes  or communities shall be punished with imprisonment  which may  extend to three years, or with fine, or  with both". It is seen that s. 153A(1). (a) is not confined to  the promotion  of feelings  of enmity  etc.  on grounds of  religion only as argued by Shri Sen but takes in promotion of  such feelings on other grounds as well such as race,  place   of  birth,   residence,  language,  caste  or community. In  the present  case we  have  to  consider  the question whether  the two  articles promote  on  grounds  of religion or  community, feelings  of enmity,  hatred or ill- will between different religious groups or communities. 1084      The first  of the articles "A tale of two communalisms" does begin  as a  sort of political thesis. According to the author  "communalism   is   an   instrument   of   political

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

minorities". His  thesis is  that militant minorities thrive on communalism.  If he wanted to develop his thesis on those lines no-one  could object.  But,  he  referred  to  Muslims generally as  "a basically  violent race" and went on to say "communalism is, therefore, an instrument of a minority with a racial  tradition of rape, loot, violence and murder as is found in  India  with  a  Muslim  population  of  12.7%.  In Pakistan the  Hindu minority  is 6.6% but because its racial tradition is  different it  does  not  indulge  in  communal riots....  Three   essentials  are   necessary  for  violent communalism. The  community must be a minority, the minority must be  sizable and  the minority  must have a tradition of murder and violence... We find these three essentials in the Muslim community  of India".  He then  stated in the article that in  Pakistan and  particularly  in  East  Bengal  peace loving and terror struck Hindu minority was being eliminated by periodical  killing and  conversions  on  a  mass  scale. "Young Hindu  males  were  compelled  to  undergo  vasectomy operations, young  and pretty Hindu girls became the victims of Islamic  beds of lust". It is then said "It is not in the nature and  religion of  the Hindu of India to be intolerant and blood-thirsty like the followers of Islam". According to him the  only answer  to the  problem of  communalism was to declare India  a Hindu State. In our opinion there cannot be the slightest  doubt that  the article  is not  even  thinly veiled as  a political  thesis; it is an undisguised attempt to promote  feelings of  enmity, hatred and ill-will between the Hindu  and the Muslim communities. It is designed to fan the sparks  of ill-will  and hatred  on ground of community. The reference to the alleged Muslim tradition of rape, loot, violence and  murder and  the alleged terror struck into the hearts of  Hindu  minority  in  a  neighbouring  country  by periodical killings,  in the  context  of  his  thesis  that communalism is  the instrument  of a  militant minority  can lead to no other inference.      The second  article ’Lingering  disgrace of history’ is said to be a protest against the naming of Delhi roads after the Moghul emperors who according to the author were lustful perverts, rapists  and murderers.  According to  the learned counsel the  attack was  directed against  the Moghul rulers and not  against the Muslims of India. It was also said that all the  statements in  the  article  about  the  lusts  and perversions of  the  Moghul  rulers  were  plain  historical truths. On  a full  reading of  the article  it reveals much more than  a protest against naming Delhi roads after Moghul rapists and perverts. At one place it is said "From Mohammed Ibn Qasim, who landed in India in June 1085 712 A.D.  with  6000  Muslim  cut-throats,  to  Mohomed  Ali Jinnah, who  cut this ancient cradle of a peace-loving human race into  three bleeding  bits in August, 1947, we have had 1235 years  of bloodstained  history in  which our  life has been constantly  punctuated by  endless raids,  rapes, loot, arson and  slaughter. In  all these  years Hindus have given millions of  men, women and children as hostages to Islam to buy some  peace and  preserve their  own religion.  They are still doing  so. God  alone knows  how long  this process of paying and  appeasing Muslims will go on but it cannot go on for long  if the  family planning  designs  of  the  present secular government  succeed. Because  then pretty soon there would be no Hindu left to pay.      "It is  difficult to  predict the future of the ancient Hindu race.  It has  no future  at all  in Pakistan  where a subtle and  systematic genocide  of the  10  million  Hindus there has  now been  undertaken at  State level by enforcing

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4  

vasectomy operations on Hindu males and tubectomies on Hindu females, and  by raping  women and converting young children to Islam.      "But as  long as  the Hindu  race lasts and survives in India its  only cradle and grave in the whole world, it will be worthwhile  setting before its children the ideals of its numerous  Hindu  heroes  and  nation  builders  rather  than reminding them constantly of these Moghul brutes and tyrants who burnt  Hindu homes,  ravished Hindu mothers and sisters, slaughtered  Hindu   men  and  harassed  and  kidnapped  and converted Hindu children".      After referring  to various  perversities and tyrannies of the  Moghul rulers  ending with  Aurangzeb, he  said: "To have a  street named after this Mughal bastard in New Delhi, the capital  of India,  is not only a disgrace to the Hindus but a crying insult to the brave community of Sikhs. Had the Muslims been  insulted thus,  they would not only have burnt every house  on the road named after the tyrant but also set fire to the whole damned city. The Muslims know how to guard their traditions". He expressed the opinion that some of the ancient relics  that reminded  Hindus  of  their  shame  and disgrace made  Muslims proud  of the  foul  deeds  of  their ancestors. He made an appeal that a beginning should be made to wipe  out ’our  thousand year  old shame’ by changing the "Muslim names  of roads"  which ’remind  us of  the  inhuman atrocities committed on our men, women and children’. If the Moghuls raped,  looted, killed and sinned, the author’s view appears to  be that  they did  so as  "Muslim sadists".  The author goes  so far as to say that today’s Muslims are proud of the  foul deeds  of "their  ancestors", the Moghuls being considered by the author as the progenitors 1086 of the present day Indian Muslims. There is no question that the article  is calculated  to  rouse  feelings  of  enmity, hatred and ill-will between Muslims and Hindus.      Whether communalism  is the weapon of an aggressive and militant minority as suggested by the accused or the "shield of  a   nervous  and   fearful  minority",  the  problem  of communalism is  not solved by castigating the members of the minority community  as intolerant  and blood  thirsty and  a community with  a tradition  of  rape,  loot,  violence  and murder. Whether  the Moghuls  were rapists  and murderers or not and  whether the  Delhi roads should be named after them or not  it was wrong to present the Moghuls as the ancestors of today’s  Muslims and  to villify the Muslims as the proud descendants of  the "foul"  Moghuls. We  are convinced  that both the  articles do promote feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between the Hindu and Muslim communities on grounds of community  and this  cannot  be  done  in  the  guise  of political  thesis  or  historical  truth.  The  appeals  are dismissed. V.D.K.                                   Appeals dismissed. 1087