MAHENDRA SINGH DHONI versus YERRAGUNTLA SHYAMSUNDAR AND ANR.

MAHENDRA SINGH DHONI versus YERRAGUNTLA SHYAMSUNDAR AND ANR.

Section 295A IPC does not penalise every act of insult; only those with deliberate and malicious intention to outrage religious feelings constitute an offence. The complaint lacked such essential ingredients and was quashed.

Parties
Petitioner: Mahendra Singh Dhoni; Respondent No. 1: Yerraguntla Shyamsundar; Respondent No. 2: Editor of Magazine (Co-accused)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Transfer Petition (criminal) No. 23 of 2016 / Final Disposal
Outcome
Petition disposed of; complaint proceedings quashed against petitioner and co-accused.
Legal Topics
Quashing of Complaint, Penal Code Section 295 a, Transfer of Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahendra Singh Dhoni

Petitioner

Yerraguntla Shyamsundar

Respondent No. 1

Editor of Magazine (Co-accused)

Respondent No. 2

Procedural Posture

Transfer Petition (criminal) No. 23 of 2016 / Final Disposal

  1. 1 Whether the allegations in the complaint constitute an offence under Section 295A of IPC.
  2. 2 Whether the complaint should be quashed due to lack of essential ingredients of the offence.
  3. 3 Doctrine of parity as applied to co-accused.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 295A IPC does not penalise every act of insult; only those with deliberate and malicious intention to outrage religious feelings constitute an offence. The complaint lacked such essential ingredients and was quashed.

Court Disposition

Petition disposed of; complaint proceedings quashed against petitioner and co-accused.

Orders

  • Complaint proceedings quashed against Mahendra Singh Dhoni and co-accused (Editor of Magazine).
  • Transfer petition and criminal miscellaneous petition stand disposed of.