Karnataka High Court quashes FIR against Jain University students, faculty over alleged Ambedkar insult [Read Order]

Karnataka: The Karnataka High Court has quashed a case registered against students and faculty members of the Jain Centre of Management Studies (Deemed University), who were booked for allegedly staging a skit that made derogatory references to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and Dalits.

Karnataka High Court Quashes FIR in Ambedkar Insult Case

Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar allowed the petitions filed by Dinesh Nilkant Borkar and others, effectively nullifying the prosecution initiated against them.

The case arose from an event at the Jain University Youth Fest-2023, held at the NIMHANS Convention Centre in Bengaluru, where students enacted a skit. A complaint was subsequently filed based on a compact disk (CD) containing a video of the skit, leading to the registration of an FIR under Sections 153A, 149, and 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), and 3(1)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Jain University Skit Controversy: Court Cites Lack of Intent

After reviewing the complaint, the FIR, and the transcript of the skit, the court found that the essential elements required to constitute the alleged offenses were absent. The court observed, “The skit was performed purely for entertainment purposes and lacked any intent to harm or humiliate any community.” It also noted that the FIR was not lodged by a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) community and that there was no material indicating a deliberate attempt to insult or intimidate.

Referring to previous judgments, including Gorige Pentaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2008) 12 SCC 531, where the Supreme Court emphasized that intent to humiliate based on caste is essential for an offense under the SC/ST Act, the court highlighted that the allegations did not meet the legal threshold. It also cited Indibly Creative (P) Ltd. v. State of West Bengal (2020) 12 SCC 436, which upheld satire and artistic expression under Article 19 of the Constitution.

The High Court ruled, “Satire and artistic expression are constitutionally protected. The allegations in this case do not fulfill the legal requirements for the offenses charged.”

Accordingly, the Karnataka High Court quashed the FIR against the petitioners, holding that continuing the case would be an abuse of the legal process.

Senior Advocate S. Sriranga, representing Advocate Sumana Naganand, appeared for the petitioners.
Additional SPP Rashmi Jadhav appeared for the respondents.

Case Title: Dinesh Nilkant Borkar & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Anr.

[Read Order]