Critics say new law has misuse clause

Ruchika M Khanna

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, September 4

Voices of dissent against Punjab’s amended blasphemy law are getting louder. Critics say it is aimed at empowering mainstream religions and supports majoritarianism.

“Should governments become custodians of religion and take away the rights of religious minorities? In a system where the police work under their political masters, bringing in such a law will be empowering the religious majority. If the police would plant a weapon on a person to frame him, now all that would  be required was a holy book,” cautioned eminent jurist Justice AS Bains (retd).

Under the amended law, incarceration for the offence of sacrilege has been increased from two years to 10 years. Also, Section 295 AA provides for life imprisonment, if sacrilege has been committed with the intention of hurting religious feelings. 

Expressing misgivings over the new law, former Deputy Speaker Bir Devinder Singh pointed out that the Indian Penal Code already had an exhaustive chapter that dealt with offences related to religion. “The amendments should have been referred to a House committee and upon receiving the response, put to vote. It is not too late. The government, instead of sending the Bill to the Governor for approval, should refer it to a select committee for a thorough review,” he suggested.

However, Punjab CM Capt Amarinder Singh is convinced that harsher punishment will act as a deterrent. “Punjab has seen almost 200 cases of sacrilege in the past three years. As CM, I cannot allow this to happen. Harsher punishment is a must to ensure such incidents do not recur,” he told The Tribune. Sources say even before the amended law was tabled in the Vidhan Sabha, some leaders in the Punjab Congress had expressed the fear that it could be misused. Leader of the Opposition Harpal Singh Cheema favours specific provisions in the Act to ensure that this does not happen.

“Misuse can be stopped only if the police are independent. There have been instances of misuse of the law even before it was amended, as in the case of desecration of the Quran in Malerkotla,” he said.

Dr Daljit Singh Cheema of the SAD backs harsher punishment. “Our party had objected to Guru Granth Sahib being equated with other religious texts and will continue doing so. The Supreme Court had, in a ruling, noted that Guru Granth Sahib could not be equated with other sacred books, reverence of which was based on a different conceptual faith,” he held.