LAWS(P&H)-1985-2-23

JOGINDER SINGH SAHNY Vs. UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH

Decided On February 08, 1985
Joginder Singh Sahny Appellant
V/S
UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A Sikh Convention (meeting) attended by about 1000/- persons was held between 9.30 A.M. to 1 P.M. on June 16, 1984, in Gurdwara Singh Sabha, Sector 19, Chandigarh. The petitioners attended and addressed the congregation. Rajinder Singh, Sub-Inspector (C.I.D) covered this meeting and on the same day reported the gist of the Speeches made by the speakers and resolutions passed to the higher authorities. The C.I.D. report regarding the speeches made by Joginder Singh Sahny and Manjit Singh Khaira petitioners reads : Joginder Singh Sahny in his speech stated that we have gathered here to mourn what has happened in the premises of Harmandar Sahib. Sikhs should be united because they are torn on the point of sword. I request that June 17, 1984 be observed by all Sikhas as Ardas Divas. They should wear black turbans and our women folk should wear black Chunnis and they should also pray for the peace of the souls of Martyrs. Manjit Singh Khaira in his speech stated that the fight has just started and has not ended. At this juncture we should unite and decide how to fight. Think within yourself and discuss with your friends. We should not give up fight nor be trapped in the enemy tactics by getting emotional. If we do so we would cause more harm to ourselves. We need not sit at home merely by out of fear of loss. The dictate of Akal Takht is binding on us. I request you not to blame anybody. Nobody can become leader by merely taking out procession or holding gathering. It is not yet known who is to be our leader.

(2.) ACCORDING to the C.I.D. report, the persons attending the meeting passed resolutions by raising hands including :

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that the speeches made by the petitioners during the convention held on June 16, 1984, are innocent and harmless. The petitioners did not preach or incite violence. They advised the audience to remain peaceful though they expressed resentment against what had happened in the recent past. The argument proceeds that the speech can be termed objectionable inviting penal action if it incites or tends to incite violence in a reasonably normal person and in this context the reaction on an extra sensitive individual is irrelevant. There is hardly any justification to assume that the prevailing atmosphere at the time the speeches were made was such that the same are capable of being interpreted to incite or tend to incite violence or disturb law and order or create disorder. In the speeches made by the petitioners, no overt act was suggested directly or indirectly. The speeches at best reflected their injured feelings. The petitioners, therefore, cannot be taken to have committed any offence including one under section 124-A, I.P.C by publicly airing their resentment against the Army action in the State and the unfortunate consequences that followed. They have been wrongly named in F.I.R. No. 298 dated June 22, 1984. Their names should be deleted therefrom. Reliance has been placed on Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar, A.I.R 1962 SC 955.