STATE OF M.P. Vs. SWAMI RISHI KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, filed by the State by Special leave, is directed against the judgment dated 19 -3 -1982 passed by Shri S.S. Yadav, Judicial Magistrate, Class -I, Rewa in Criminal Case No. 313 of 1980 acquitting the respondent of offence punishable under Section 295 -A of the Indian Penal Code The respondent along with one Shri Shyamsundar Trivedi was prosecuted for the aforesaid offence and acquitted. The appeal was filed against both of them. Unfortunately, the co -accused respondent Shri Shyamsundar Trivedi died during the pendency of this appeal and hence it survives only against the respondent. Bhai Bhikhraj and Maniklal Sharma claiming to be the two original complainants also feel aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal and have preferred a revision under section 297/401 Cr. P. C. against the same, which is subject matter of Cr. Revision No. 447/83 (Bhai Bhikhraj and another v. Swamy Rishi Kumar & another) Since this appeal and the revision arise out of the same judgment, both of them are being disposed of by this judgment. The subject matter of the dispute is the complaint of the followers of Pranami Dharm propagated by Swami Pran Nathji and known as 'Nijanand Sampradai', to the effect that the respondent by publishing the book named 'Nijanand Mimansa' has maliciously insulted their religion and religious beliefs and has thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 295 -A I.P.C. The respondent accused claims to be a Swami of Panch Matha, Rewa and, therefore, an important Hindu religious leader. It is rather paradoxical that though both the complainants and the respondent -claim to be the followers of Hindu Religion, they are lighting against each other in the name of their own religion. However, the redeeming feature of the dispute is that both have approached the Court for redressal of their grievances indicating their faith in the secular character of the Court and administration of justice through it. Inspite of it, the Court feels that it would have been far better if they had themselves studied the historical development of Hindu Religion and philosophy. They would have been learnt that from time to time saints and religious reformers have attempted to remove from the Hindu thoughts and practices, elements of corruption and superstitions and that led to the formation of different sects. Lord Buddha started Buddhism, Lord Mahavira founded Jainism, Guru Nanakji Deo inspired Sikhism, Swami Dayanand founded Arya Samaj and Chaitanya Maha Prabhu began the Bhakti cult, all leading to the original Hindu thought and philosophy, pure and free from the superstitions. They would have also learnt that as a result of teachings of Swami Ramakrishna and Swami Vivekananda, Hindu Religions flowered into its most attractive, progressive and dynamic form. The teachings of these saints and religious reformers may indicate an amount of divergence in their respective views and ideas and yet underneath that divergency, there is a kind of subtle indescribable unity, which keeps them within the sweep of broad and progressive Hindu Religion. The philosophy, concept and principles evolved by different Hindu thinkers and philosophers would also establish that it was realised by Hindu religion from the very beginning of its career that truth was many sided and different view contained different aspects of truth which no one could fully express. This knowledge inevitably bred a spirit of tolerance and willingness to understand and appreciate the opponent's point of view. That is how, the several views set -forth in India in regard to the vital philosophic contents are considered to be the branches of the selfsame tree This spirit of tolerance, if imbibed by the parties, would not only have avoided the unpleasant dispute, but would have also permitted both of them to contribute their best to the development of their religion - -the Hindu Religion - -to the best of their knowledge and ability However, life is not what it should be and the Courts are one of the agencies intended to remind the contesting parties of these basic principles of life Inspite of it, this Court is aware of its shortcomings and is undertaking this job in a spirit of dedication with a prayer that truth should ultimately prevail and the parties get enlightenment to rededicate themselves to the Path of virtue voluntarily chosen by themselves.

(2.) FACTS of the case are rather short. Swami Pran Nath, a Hindu by birth, claimed to have received orders from his Guru Deochand to propagate the best in Vaishna v. Sampradai and for that purpose studied and compiled 'Kuljam Swaroop' (Article -B). 'Kuljam Swaroop' contains not only the teachings of Swami Prannath, but his views on various religious practices including that of Hindu Religion. On the basis of these teachings, Swamiji founded a sect known as 'Nijanand Sampradai', which has its followers mainly in Madhya Pradesh and Saurastra (Gujrat) Some of the verses of Kuljam Swaroop are in Arabic, though their meaning and content are explained in Hindi. Late Shri Shyamsundar Trivedi felt that some of these verses amount to a direct attack on Hindu Religion and tend to promote Islamic teachings. Fired by his enthusiasm to protect Hindu Religion from such an attack, he published' Nijanand Mimamsa'(Article -A) pointing out how Swami Pran Nathji was an anti -Hindu and how he tried to insult and humiliate Hindu Gods, particularly, lord Vishnu He also brought out the fact that Kuljam Swaroop and Pranami Dharm were nothing, but a clever method of destroying Hindu religion and propagating Islam Soon after this book was published, the followers of Pranami Dharm felt that their religion and religious beliefs were distorted and a malicious attempt has been made to insult it This Pranami Dharm has its own temple at Panna (MP.). A complaint was filed by Maniklal Sharma, Secretary of the Board of Trustees of the said Pran Nathji Mandir Trust praying for action against the writer Late Shri Shyamsundar Trivedi and publisher, the present respondent. A similar report was also lodged by Bhai Bhikraj, a Journalist of Rewa. It further appears that because of this work, religious tempers mounted posing a threat to law and order situation The State Government, therefore, exercising its power under Section 95 Cr. P. C. forfeited this book by its order published in Madhya Pradesh Rajpatra dated 1st February, 1975. Later on, a chargesheet was filed against the respondent for offence as aforesaid. The defence of the respondent Swami Rishi Kumar in the trial Court was that he has read 'Nijanand Mimimsa' thoroughly and honestly felt that it was the correct translation of 'Kuljam Swaroop'. According to him, he has written the foreword to the said book after having studied it and believed this translation of Late Shri Shyamsundar Trivedi to be correct and still feels that there is nothing wrong in the said writing He also submitted that he had never been the publisher of the book nor had he consented to its publication and his name as publisher was appearing unauthorisedly. The learned trial Judge, on examination of oral evidence adduced by the prosecution and considering the contents of 'Kuljam Swaroop', concluded that 'Nijanand Mimamsa' contains correct translation of the said book. The learned Judge also concluded that from various verses of 'Kuljam Swaroop', it can reasonably be said that Swami Pran Nathji was rightly doubted to be a Hindu. Since the learned Judge found that many of the verses were anti -Hindu, he held that it is reasonable to hold that Swami Pran Nathji was not a Hindu. Since the learned Judge felt that the book 'Nijanand Mimamsa' was not an original work, but was translation of 'Kuljam Swaroop', he held that it cannot be held that it was published maliciously to insult either the religion or religious beliefs of the followers of Pranami Dharm. That is how, it was held that the respondents have not committed any offence. They were accordingly acquitted honourably. That is how the matter is before this Court for its consideration.

(3.) AS far as the respondent Swami Rishi Kumar is concerned, he is accused of not only publishing the book but also writing a foreword to it The offending portions of the foreword are said to be at pages X, XI & XII of the book. It is also submitted that pages XIV to XX contain distortions of the original teaching of Swami Pran Nathji and are intended to prove that he was a Muslim and anti -Hindu. Most offending portion is said to be the following appearing at pages XI & XII of the foreword : -