The Himachal Pradesh High Court on Friday declined to quash an FIR registered against 13 men accused of distributing books containing allegedly defamatory remarks against Hindu gods and saints. However, the Court set aside the criminal proceedings pending before a Solan trial court, holding that the mandatory prosecution sanction under Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) had not been obtained.

Justice Rakesh Kainthla ruled that while the FIR disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence, the trial court could not have taken cognizance of the case without the requisite sanction from the competent authority.

The Court clarified that the State is free to initiate fresh proceedings after securing the necessary sanction, if permissible under law.

"This order will not prevent the State from instituting fresh proceedings after obtaining the sanction, if otherwise permissible under the law. The petitioners shall be at liberty to raise all the pleas before the learned Trial Court if any such charge sheet is filed," the Court observed.

The case stems from an FIR registered in June 2023, alleging that the accused were distributing books authored by Sant Rampal, which allegedly contained derogatory and defamatory remarks against Hindu deities and saints.

Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Arjun Sheoran argued that the complainant had selectively quoted passages from the books out of context. He further contended that the prosecution was legally unsustainable because no prior sanction had been obtained as required for offences under Section 295-A IPC.

The State submitted that it had sought prosecution sanction from the District Magistrate through a letter dated June 13 and maintained that the books were distributed with the intention of hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus.

After considering the rival submissions, the High Court held that the allegations in the FIR, on their face, disclose a cognizable offence and therefore do not warrant quashing at the preliminary stage.

The Court observed that whether the contents of the books are actually objectionable or justified is a matter to be examined during trial.

It further noted that making allegedly defamatory remarks against Hindu gods and saints, who are revered by a large section of society, could prima facie indicate an intention to outrage religious feelings by insulting religious beliefs.

The Court also rejected the argument that circulation of books already available in the public domain cannot constitute an offence. It held that this is a matter of evidence to be established during trial and cannot be decided while considering a plea to quash the FIR.

Accordingly, the High Court partly allowed the petition by refusing to quash the FIR while setting aside the pending trial proceedings due to the absence of mandatory prosecution sanction. It granted liberty to the State to revive the prosecution after obtaining the required approval.

Advocates Arjun Sheoran and Heena Chauhan appeared for the petitioners, Additional Advocate General Lokender Kutlehria represented the State, and Advocate Dhanwanti appeared for the complainant.