Indian Penal Code: Section 153

Select Language Afrikaans Albanian Arabic Armenian Azerbaijani Basque Belarusian Bulgarian Bengali Catalan Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Traditional) Croatian Czech Danish Dutch English Estonian Filipino Finnish French Galician Georgian German Greek Gujarati Haitian Creole Hebrew Hindi Hungarian Icelandic Indonesian Irish Italian Japanese Javanese Kannada Khmer Korean Latvian Lithuanian Macedonian Malay Maltese Marathi Nepali Norwegian Persian Polish Portuguese Punjabi Romanian Russian Serbian Slovak Slovenian Spanish Swahili Swedish Tamil Telugu Thai Turkish Ukrainian Urdu Vietnamese Welsh Yiddish

This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. Additional information may please be sent as messages to the Facebook community, Indpaedia.com. All information used will be gratefully acknowledged in your name.

Section 153A: promoting enmity between different groups 

Justice Vivian Bose’s 1947 ruling

Khadija Khan, March 10, 2024: The Indian Express

What was Justice Vivian Bose’s 1947 ruling?

In 1947, a three-judge bench of the Nagpur HC, comprising Justice Vivian Bose, was tasked with deciding whether a particular article in the press, directly or indirectly, tended to bring about hatred or contempt for the government. In doing so, it also examined the offence of sedition under Section 124A of the IPC, which deals with the offence of sedition, and Section 4(1) of the Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931.

Justice Vivian Bose held that the said article didn’t incite or lead to sedition. He also came up with a test, which went on to become the yardstick for such cases to be decided in the future.

In his judgment, he ruled: “The effect of the words must be judged from the standards of reasonable, strong-minded, firm and courageous men, and not those of weak and vacillating minds, nor of those who scent danger in every hostile point of view”.

Similarly, in its 1988 ruling in Ramesh v. Union of India, popularly known as the TAMAS case, the top court reiterated this view. It dismissed a PIL to ban the exhibition of the television serial “Tamas” on the ground that it offends or is likely to offend public order and public morality and create public danger.

In the case against the college professor also, the top court referred to the yardstick laid down by Justice Vivian Bose.

The court said: “The (Bombay) High Court has held that the possibility of stirring up the emotions of a group of people cannot be ruled out… As held by Vivian Bose, J, the effect of the words used by the appellant on his WhatsApp status will have to be judged from the standards of reasonable women and men. We cannot apply the standards of people with weak and vacillating minds. Our country has been a democratic republic for more than 75 years. The people of our country know the importance of democratic values. Therefore, it is not possible to conclude that the words will promote disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious groups”.