Madras HC Quashes Section 295 IPC Prosecution Over Video Sharing a Political Statement About Police and Muslims

Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy held that sharing a video with a political opinion about policing does not attract Section 295 IPC, which requires destruction or defilement of a place of worship.

The Madras High Court on 27 July 2026 quashed criminal proceedings against two Coimbatore residents who had been charged under Section 295 of the Indian Penal Code for circulating a video through a mobile phone. The video allegedly contained a statement that police were foisting false cases against Muslims and that, as in North India, similar acts were now taking place in South India, making it difficult for Muslims to live peacefully. Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, sitting singly, found that even accepting the entire allegation at face value, the essential ingredients of Section 295 IPC were entirely absent, and continuing the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

The Charge and the Proceedings Below

The two petitioners — Sherip, son of Abdul Kadhar, and Jeenath, wife of Abdul Kadhar — both reside at 162, Kannusamy Gounder Cross 2nd Street, Shanmuga Nagar, Coimbatore North. A case was registered against them as Crime No. 120 of 2024 by the Inspector of Police, C-5, Kavundampalayam Police Station, Coimbatore City.

After investigation, a final report was filed and the matter was taken up as C.C. No. 6111 of 2025 before the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Coimbatore. The charge in that final report was for the offence under Section 295 IPC.

The petitioners approached the Madras High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking to call for the records of C.C. No. 6111 of 2025 and quash the proceedings. Two connected miscellaneous petitions, CRL.MP. Nos. 13333 and 13334 of 2026, were filed alongside.

What Section 295 IPC Actually Requires

Section 295 IPC penalises the destruction, damage, or defilement of any place of worship or any object held sacred by any class of persons, committed with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons, or with the knowledge that such destruction, damage, or defilement is likely to be regarded as an insult to their religion.

The court read the provision carefully before turning to the facts of the case. The focus of the offence, as the bench observed, is a physical act directed at a place of worship or a sacred object — not a verbal or recorded statement, however controversial.

Why the Allegation Could Not Sustain the Charge

The allegation, even taken entirely at face value, was that the petitioners circulated a recorded video containing a political opinion about police conduct towards Muslims. There was no allegation that the petitioners destroyed, damaged, or defiled any place of worship or any object held sacred by any class of persons.

Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy held that the content of the video — a statement that police were foisting false cases against a community and that conditions resembled those in North India — merely constituted a political statement. The bench stated that the essential ingredients of Section 295 IPC were “conspicuously absent” on the record.

The court went further: even assuming the statements of all listed witnesses to be true on the face of the record, no offence under Section 295 IPC was made out against either petitioner. There was simply no factual foundation for the charge as framed.

The bench then applied the well-established principle that where no offence is made out even on the prosecution's own version, permitting the criminal prosecution to continue would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

Order

The Criminal Original Petition was allowed. The proceedings in C.C. No. 6111 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Coimbatore, were quashed in their entirety. The two connected miscellaneous petitions were closed as a consequence.

The order was addressed to the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Coimbatore; the Inspector of Police, C-5, Kavundampalayam Police Station, Coimbatore City; and the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.