Mumbai, Maharashtra – May 4, 2022 – Navneet Rana, a Member of Parliament, and Ravi Rana, a Member of Legislative Assembly, have been granted bail in a sedition case registered at Khar Police Station (C.R. No. 500/2022). The Additional Sessions Judge, R.N. Rokade, of the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay, approved their bail application (Bail Application No. 962 of 2022) citing the absence of evidence indicating an intention to incite violence or create public disorder.

Background of the Case:

The Rana couple was arrested and charged under Sections 124-A (sedition) and 153-A (promoting enmity between different groups) read with Section 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as well as Sections¹ 37(1) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. The charges stemmed from their announcement to recite Hanuman Chalisa (a Hindu religious hymn) outside the private residence of Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray.

Allegations and Arrest:

The prosecution alleged that the Rana couple’s announcement, despite a notice from the police under Section 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), was intended to create law and order problems and potentially destabilize the state government. They were arrested on April 23, 2022, and remanded to judicial custody.

Defense Arguments:

Mr. Abad Ponda, representing the Rana couple, argued that their arrest was illegal and violated their constitutional rights. He contended that the FIR did not disclose offenses under Section 153-A of the IPC or the Maharashtra Police Act. He emphasized that the couple had withdrawn their plan to recite Hanuman Chalisa and had no intention to cause ill will or hatred. He also argued that the arrest was made without complying with Sections 41 and 41A of the Cr.P.C. and without the necessary sanctions under Sections 196 and 197 of the Cr.P.C.

Prosecution’s Counter-Arguments:

Mr. Pradeep Gharat, the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP), argued that the couple’s announcement was a calculated move to challenge law and order and potentially lead to the dissolution of the state government. He contended that their statements were made with the intention to create hatred and contempt against the government and that they had deliberately provoked the followers of the ruling party. He also cited the couple’s criminal antecedents and the potential for them to influence witnesses.

Court’s Observations and Decision:

Judge Rokade emphasized that the key ingredient for sedition under Section 124-A of the IPC is the incitement of violence or creation of public disorder. He noted that the prosecution’s case did not allege that the couple’s announcement was intended to incite violence.

“The said announcement do not in any manner have the tendency of subverting the Government by violent means, nor do the same have the effect of creating hatred, disaffection or contempt for the Government,” Judge Rokade stated in his order.

The court acknowledged that the couple’s statements against the Chief Minister were “extremely objectionable” and that they had “crossed the lines of freedom of speech and expression.” However, the court concluded that mere expression of derogatory words was not sufficient to invoke Section 124-A of the IPC.

“Therefore, though the statements and acts of applicants are blameworthy, the same cannot be stretched too far to bring within the ambit of section 124A of IPC,” Judge Rokade stated.

The court also noted that the couple had dropped their plan to recite Hanuman Chalisa before the FIR was registered and that no violence was incited as a result of their statements.

Bail Conditions:

The court granted bail to the Rana couple, subject to the following conditions:

• They must execute a Personal Recognizance (PR) Bond of Rs. 50,000 each with one or two solvent sureties of the same amount.
• They must make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when called, with at least 24 hours prior notice.
• They must not influence witnesses, tamper with evidence, or interfere with the investigation.
• They must not address the press on any subject related to the case.
• They must provide their mobile numbers and residential addresses to the Investigating Officer.
• They must produce proof of identity and residence.
• They must not commit similar offenses while on bail.
• Breach of any condition would entail cancellation of bail.

Significance of the Ruling:

This ruling highlights the court’s emphasis on the necessity of incitement to violence or creation of public disorder for the offense of sedition. The court’s decision underscores the importance of balancing freedom of speech and expression with the need to maintain public order.

Key Factors in the Bail Grant:

• Absence of evidence indicating an intention to incite violence.
• The couple’s withdrawal of their plan to recite Hanuman Chalisa.
• The court’s interpretation of Section 124-A of the IPC.
• Conditions to ensure the couple’s presence and prevent witness intimidation.

Future Proceedings:

The investigation in the case will continue, and the prosecution will be required to prove the charges against the Rana couple beyond a reasonable doubt in the trial court. The court will monitor the couple’s compliance with the bail conditions.