Calling Someone ‘Miyan’ or ‘Pakistani’ Not a Crime: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has ruled that the use of terms like "Miyan-Tiyan" or "Pakistani" may be distasteful but does not constitute a criminal offence warranting penal action for allegedly wounding religious sentiments. The verdict was delivered while quashing a criminal case against an 80-year-old man accused of making such remarks.

A bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma observed, "The appellant is accused of hurting the religious feelings of the informant by calling him ‘Miyan-Tiyan’ and ‘Pakistani’. Undoubtedly, the statements made are in poor taste. However, it does not amount to hurting religious sentiments."

Case Background

The case originated from a First Information Report (FIR) registered in Bokaro, Jharkhand, based on a complaint by Md Shamim Uddin, an Urdu translator and acting clerk under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. According to the complaint, Hari Nandan Singh, an 80-year-old man, allegedly insulted the complainant using communal slurs and exerted criminal force against him while he was performing official duties.

Following an investigation, the police filed a charge sheet, and in July 2021, a magistrate took cognisance of the offences, summoning Singh. He was charged under Sections 298 (hurting religious sentiments), 504 (intentional insult to provoke breach of peace), 506 (criminal intimidation), 353 (assault to deter public servant from duty), and 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Singh later sought discharge, and the magistrate, on March 24, 2022, dropped charges under Section 323 but retained charges under Sections 298, 353, and 504. His appeals before the Bokaro additional sessions judge and the Jharkhand High Court were unsuccessful, prompting him to approach the Supreme Court.

SC’s Legal Reasoning

In its February 11 judgment, recently released, the Supreme Court referred to its earlier ruling in Sajjan Kumar vs CBI (2010), which lays down principles for framing charges. The bench found that the FIR did not establish the essential ingredients of the alleged offences.

Examining the charges under Sections 298, 504, and 353 IPC, the court held that Singh’s remarks, while inappropriate, did not meet the legal threshold to constitute an offence under Section 298. It further noted that under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), effective from July 2024, Section 298 IPC has been replaced by Section 302.

Additionally, the bench found no material evidence to suggest that Singh used criminal force against the complainant to warrant a charge under Section 353 IPC. It also rejected the applicability of Section 504, stating that derogatory words alone do not amount to an offence unless they pose an imminent threat to public disorder.

Verdict and Implications

Setting aside the Jharkhand High Court's order, the Supreme Court allowed Singh’s appeal and exonerated him of all charges. The ruling underscores that while offensive language may be inappropriate, it does not necessarily constitute a criminal offence unless it directly incites violence or public disorder.