Offences Relating to Religion: Chapter XVI of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

India, as a diverse and secular nation, upholds the protection of religious sentiments through various legal provisions. To maintain communal harmony and prevent religious discord, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 incorporates specific provisions penalizing acts that offend religious beliefs or disrupt religious practices. Indian Constitution ensures the protection of religious sentiments through various provisions, primarily under Articles 25 to 30.

Chapter XVI (Of Offences Relating to Religion) of the BNS specifically addresses offences related to religion, offering legal safeguards against actions that insult religious beliefs, desecrate places of worship, or disturb religious assemblies. Previously, Chapter XV (Of Offences Relating to Religion) of the Indian Penal Code addressed such offences through five sections—Section 295, Section 295A, Section 296, Section 297, and Section 298—which dealt with acts insulting religious beliefs, disrupting religious assemblies, or desecrating places of worship.

This article comprehensively examines Sections 298 to 302 of the BNS, which govern such offences.

Injuring or Defiling a Place of Worship with Intent to Insult Religion (Section 298)

Section 298 penalizes the destruction, damage, or defilement of any place of worship or object held sacred by any religious group with the intent to insult the religion or with the knowledge that such an act would be considered offensive. The punishment for this offence includes imprisonment of up to two years, a fine, or both. This provision aims to deter acts of vandalism and desecration that could lead to communal tensions.

Deliberate and Malicious Acts to Outrage Religious Feelings (Section 299)

Section 299 criminalizes deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings. This includes spoken or written words, signs, visible representations, or electronic means that insult or attempt to insult a religion or religious beliefs. The punishment for this offence extends to three years of imprisonment, a fine, or both. The inclusion of electronic means highlights the increasing relevance of digital platforms in spreading religious intolerance.

Disturbance of Religious Assemblies (Section 300)

Under Section 300, voluntarily causing disturbances to lawful religious assemblies is punishable with imprisonment of up to one year, a fine, or both. This provision safeguards the right to practice religion peacefully and ensures that individuals engaged in religious worship are not subjected to disruptions or harassment.

Trespassing on Burial Places and Indignity to Human Corpses (Section 301)

Section 301 penalizes trespassing in places of worship, burial grounds, or sites designated for funeral rites to wound religious sentiments or insult religion. It also criminalizes offering indignity to human corpses or disturbing funeral ceremonies. The punishment includes imprisonment of up to one year, a fine, or both. This provision upholds the sanctity of burial grounds and ensures respect for the deceased and their religious customs.

Uttering Words with Intent to Wound Religious Feelings (Section 302)

Section 302 criminalizes any act of uttering words, making sounds, gestures, or placing objects in a manner that deliberately wounds the religious feelings of any person. The punishment for such an act extends to one year of imprisonment, a fine, or both. This provision aims to curb hate speech and actions that could incite religious disharmony.

Important Case Laws

[1] Surdarshan Kumar & Ors. v. Gangacharan Dubey & Anr. (1999)

This case involved a revision petition challenging the order of the CJM, Sagar, which took cognizance under Section 297/34 IPC against four police officers for allegedly showing indignity to the corpse of Raju Munda, a criminal killed in an encounter. The complainants argued that tying his body to a watch tower in a public place after the post-mortem insulted the dead and violated human rights.

The petitioners contended that the body was exhibited due to a large crowd gathering to confirm his death and to prevent a law-and-order crisis. The deceased’s father had refused to accept the body, and it was later cremated by authorities. The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the police officials acted in the colour of duty to control public unrest, with no intent to insult the body, and that prosecution without sanction under Section 197 CrPC was impermissible. Consequently, the court quashed the prosecution and set aside the lower court’s order.

[2] Queen-Empress v. Subhan & Anr. (1896)

In this case, the accused were convicted under Section 297 IPC for ploughing land that had recently been used as a graveyard, thereby disturbing graves. Subhan admitted to ploughing the land, while Sahir provided bullocks for the act. The defence argued that there was no trespass or intent to wound religious sentiments, as the landowner permitted the act. However, the Allahabad High Court held that Section 297 applies even when the accused acts with knowledge that their actions are likely to wound religious feelings, regardless of intent. The court ruled that disturbing a burial site constituted an act of injury, and thus upheld the conviction.

References

[1] Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023

[2] Indian Penal Code, 1860

[3] Surdarshan Kumar And Ors. v. Gangacharan Dubey And Anr.,  2000 CRILJ 1618

[4] Queen-Empress v. Subhan, (1896) ILR 18 All 395