The Bombay High Court has declined to quash criminal proceedings against AIMIM MLA Akbaruddin Owaisi over allegedly objectionable remarks concerning Lord Ram and his mother, holding that the statements, at the prima facie stage, appeared to have been made with an intention to mock religious figures and hurt the sentiments of their devotees.
Justice R M Joshi, sitting at the Aurangabad Bench, dismissed Owaisi’s application seeking quashing of the criminal case pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Ardhapur in Nanded district. The proceedings relate to offences under Sections 295A and 298 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case arises from a speech delivered by Owaisi at an election rally in Nanded on December 8, 2011. A complaint concerning the speech was subsequently lodged in January 2013. Following investigation, police filed a chargesheet in March 2021, after which the Magistrate took cognisance and issued process against the AIMIM leader in November 2021.
Owaisi had approached the High Court contending, among other grounds, that the criminal proceedings were legally unsustainable and that cognisance had been taken beyond the prescribed limitation period.
The High Court, however, found sufficient material at the present stage to allow the prosecution to continue. Justice Joshi noted that the speech initially dealt with issues surrounding the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute and references to claims concerning the birthplace of Lord Ram. The Court observed that the subsequent portions of the speech, which it deliberately chose not to reproduce, prima facie suggested an attempt to ridicule Lord Ram and his mother.
The Court emphasised that the manner, tone and context in which the statements were allegedly made would be relevant while assessing the prosecution. It observed that the remarks appeared measured rather than spontaneous and, prima facie, were capable of offending the religious beliefs of those who worship Lord Ram.
Justice Joshi further observed that a public representative is expected to exercise a greater degree of responsibility in his speech. According to the Court, the statements in question did not advance the arguments surrounding the Ram Janmabhoomi litigation but instead appeared to take the form of mockery.
A significant aspect of the judgment was the Court’s examination of the balance between freedom of speech and protection of religious sentiments. The Bench reiterated that freedom of speech is not absolute and remains subject to constitutionally permissible restrictions.
The Court also referred to the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence concerning Section 295A IPC, under which only deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings attract criminal liability. Mere inadvertent, careless or unwitting criticism, by itself, would not satisfy that threshold.
Applying that principle, the High Court held that the allegations in the present case could not, at the threshold, be characterised as inherently absurd or incapable of constituting an offence. The Court also noted that Owaisi had not specifically pleaded that he lacked any intention to hurt the religious sentiments of the concerned class.
The Court rejected the argument that the proceedings should be terminated solely on the ground of delay. It observed that the question concerning limitation and the Magistrate’s jurisdiction could be examined at an appropriate stage and did not, in the circumstances, warrant quashing of the entire prosecution.
The judgment also addressed a separate concern regarding the continued availability of the speech on YouTube. The Court observed that if the allegedly objectionable speech remained publicly accessible despite cognisance having been taken by the competent court, its continued circulation could perpetuate the alleged insult to the religious sentiments that formed the subject matter of the prosecution.
At the same time, the Court refrained from issuing directions concerning the online availability of the speech, noting that the necessary parties were not before it. It expressed the expectation that the government would take appropriate steps in accordance with law.
The High Court ultimately dismissed Owaisi’s application, leaving the criminal proceedings before the trial court intact. The ruling does not determine Owaisi’s guilt; rather, it holds that the allegations and material on record disclose sufficient grounds for the prosecution to proceed and that the case does not meet the threshold for exercise of the High Court’s quashing jurisdiction.
Case: Akbar Uddin Sultan Salahuddin Owaisi v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 408
Judge: Justice R M Joshi
Date of judgment: August 6, 2026
The post Akbaruddin Owaisi speech prima facie intended to mock Lord Ram, hurt religious sentiments: Bombay High Court refuses to quash proceedings appeared first on India Legal.