Tricolour atop mosque replaced by another; HC denies bail in case

Less than a month after a case was registered over the removal of the National Flag from a mosque and its replacement with a saffron flag, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has denied bail to one of the accused. The Bench, among other things, held that the gravity of the offence and its potential to disturb public order and communal peace could not be overlooked at this stage.

Justice Manisha Batra’s Bench was told that the FIR in the matter was registered on July 7 under the provisions of the BNS and the Prevention of Insult to National Honours Act at Bilaspur police station in Gurugram district.

The State counsel told the Bench that there were serious and specific allegations against the petitioner, who with an intent to create communal tension in the vicinity “got the National Flag hoisted in the mosque of Uton village removed and instead thereof had furled a saffron flag in place of the same with an intent to cause hurt to religious feelings….”.

The Bench was told that there were specific allegations against the petitioner. “For conducting a deeper probe, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must,” the State counsel asserted while seeking the dismissal of the plea.

Justice Batra said the allegations against the petitioner were not vague or general in nature, but specific and substantiated by initial investigation, including purported conversations between the petitioner and the co-accused during the commission of the alleged act.

“The gravity of the offence and its potential impact on public order and communal peace cannot be overlooked at this stage. No extraordinary or exceptional circumstance has been brought on record by the petitioner that would warrant the grant of pre-arrest bail, particularly in light of the serious communal and constitutional implications of the alleged conduct,” Justice Batra stated.

Taking into consideration the nature of allegations as levelled against the petitioner, coupled with the fact that no exceptional or sparing circumstance for grant of pre-arrest bail was made out, he said a proper probe was required to be conducted into the manner.

“This Court is of the considered opinion that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must and no ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed,” said the court.