Blog Details

SECTION 153 A:

The purpose of Section 153 A is to punish individuals who malign or defame a class of people by attacking their religion, race, place of birth—or any other factor that makes them identifiable as part of the group. Section 153 A is an Indian Penal Code (IPC) section that defines the offence of promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, language, caste or community and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.

The scope of this Section has been widened so as to make it an offense to create disharmony, enmity or feelings of hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups.

Offenses for which moral turpitude is involved come under the ambit of this section. Such offences are cognizable, and punishment can extend up to three years or with a fine, or both. The punishment for an offense committed in a place of worship can be increased from three months to five years imprisonment.

SECTION 295:

Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) makes destruction, damage, or defilement of a place of worship or an object held sacred—with intent to insult the religion of a class of people—punishable with imprisonment for up to two years and/or fines.

The purpose of this section is to ensure that people from different religious backgrounds can coexist in peace, free from the threat of violence.

However, the provision has been misused by people with vested interests to settle scores against their opponents. The law has been used to clamp down on freedom of expression, which is a fundamental right granted to citizens of India.

SECTION 295-A: 

Section 295-A was enacted to punish deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or exploiting a person’s ignorance.

This section punishes an aggravated form of insult to religion only when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging religious feelings that are generally held by a class.

This section is applicable only when the act of insult to religion is done with a deliberate and malicious intention, i.e., with the knowledge that one’s act would outrage religious feelings and with an express intention to outrage those feelings.

Present Day Situation - 

These laws are prime examples of laws that were conceived during colonial rule and have since been used in ways unimaginable by their creators. The state and central governments have used them in ways that concern observers, raising questions about the future of press freedom and civil liberties.

The National Crime Records Bureau's latest report found that the number of cases registered under section 153A rose from 323 in 2014 to 1,804 by 2020—an increase of six times. The section is used widely by local officials seeking to quash dissent and muzzle free speech within their jurisdictions. These cases have one of the lowest conviction rates (20.2 percent) and highest pendency rates (64.3%). Clearly, they are further clogging India's criminal justice system—and many lawyers think that many such complaints are false or frivolous.

Experts say the continued use of these laws is politically expedient, but flawed juristically. States have used it to register false and frivolous cases in order to mold favorable public opinion. The government's heavy-handed response has had a chilling effect on press freedom, too. When even failed attempts at sarcasm can land reporters in jail, self-censorship tends to become the norm rather than an exception. 

A disturbing trend is observed in the way applications are filed under both these sections—even trivial criticisms and comments.

Politicians may use the courts to appease their religious constituents. The rising intolerance and the advent of social media have led to an increase in cases where people are arrested for making offensive or inflammatory comments, but 295-A is a non-bailable offence—which means that once someone has been charged with this law they will be held in custody until their trial.

While many believe that restrictions on freedom of expression in India are a leftover from colonial times, or used by governments to harass their opponents and the press, such rules also reflect Indian society's values. India's political leaders and citizens generally believe that preventing incitement of religious violence is important, given the country's diverse population.

Legal reforms are needed to eliminate censorship laws, which can have a stifling effect on free speech and expression. The Parliament is responsible for enacting such changes since it's the primary law reformer in this country. Reforms to free speech-related laws have been slow in coming because legislators did not prioritize these reforms when the country gained independence.

Because defamation law is so often abused, it needs to be looked at with a closer scrutiny. While some restrictions on free speech are reasonable, not everything can amount to defamation—there needs to be a line drawn somewhere.

The laws need to be revised so that a reasonable interpretation of the statutes is allowed. What needs to be decided are what limits should exist on speech, and these cases must be judged individually rather than by a standard code.

We should review all outdated laws to determine whether they are still relevant in the digital age. We need a comprehensive reform of free speech legislation that takes into account how technology has changed society and communication.