RAVEENA TANDON Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that from the contents of FIR, none of the ingredients pertaining to offence under Sec. 295-A IPC are made out; the allegations made by respondent No.2 are vague and general in nature with the ulterior motive to fasten the criminal liability on the petitioners. The petitioners' statements cannot be perceived to be disrespectful or hurtful to the sentiments of the Christian brothers or do not remotely qualify to constitute the offence under Sec. 295-A IPC. He further contends that the FIR has been concocted on non-existent facts. He placed reliance on the judgment in Bhagwati Charan Shukla v. Provincial Government, AIR 1947 Nag 1 and judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramji Lal v. State of U.P., AIR 1957 SC 620.

(2.) On the asking of the Court, Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners is directed to supply a complete set of paper book to the learned State counsel during the course of the day.