Hanuman Chalisa: HC refuses to quash FIR towards Ranas; says public officers should act extra responsibly 

By PTI

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court Monday dismissed a writ petition filed by lawmaker couple Navneet Rana and Ravi Rana, arrested beneath numerous costs in reference to the Hanuman Chalisa controversy, in search of that one of many two FIRs registered towards them beneath part 353 of the IPC be quashed.

The courtroom stated the petitioners and all others occupying public positions should act extra responsibly and present respect in direction of different public individuals.

“As is often said, with great power comes great responsibility,” a bench of Justices P B Varale and S M Modak noticed, including they discovered no advantage within the plea filed by the Rana couple.

ALSO READ | ‘Hanuman Chalisa’ row: MP Navneet Rana, MLA-husband transfer courtroom in search of bail in sedition FIR

The bench, nevertheless, stated that if the police determine to arrest the Ranas or take another coercive motion towards them primarily based on the second FIR, it should give them discover of 72 hours.

The Khar police in Mumbai registered two FIRs (First Information Reports) towards Independent MP from Amravati Navneet Rana and her MLA husband Ravi Rana between April 23 and April 24, following their assertion that they might recite ‘Hanuman Chalisa’ exterior Maharashtra chief minister and Shiv Sena president Uddhav Thackeray’s personal residence, ‘Matoshree’ in Bandra on April 23.

Their announcement triggered offended protests by Shiv Sena employees who gathered exterior the couple’s residence in Khar space on Saturday in search of their apology.

The first FIR towards the Ranas was filed at Khar police station round 5:30 PM on April 23 on the cost of selling enmity between completely different religions.

The police subsequently added the cost of sedition to this FIR.

On April 24, a second FIR was filed towards the Ranas at round 2 AM beneath part 353 (Assault or legal pressure to discourage public servant from discharge of his responsibility) of the Indian Penal Code.

According to the second FIR, when the Rana couple was arrested and requested to get within the police car, they argued with the police and “some dhakka-bukki (jostling)” happened.

The Rana couple, at the moment in judicial custody, approached the excessive courtroom on Monday morning in search of the quashing of the second FIR via advocate Rizwan Merchant.

Merchant instructed the HC that every one the offences had been a part of the identical occasion and that two separate FIRs had been registered by the police out of vendetta- in order that if granted bail within the first FIR, the Ranas might be arrested within the second FIR.

Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Pradip Gharat argued that each the FIRs had been the results of two separate incidents- the primary was primarily based on the declaration of the recitation (of Hanuman Chalisa), and the second was registered when the couple resisted arrest.

The excessive courtroom stated it discovered advantage within the SPP’s submission.

“These are two independent, different events and not part of the same series of events. We find no reason to grant relief,” the HC stated. 

The bench, nevertheless, stated that if the police determined to arrest the Ranas or to take another coercive motion towards them primarily based on the second FIR, it should give them prior discover of 72 hours.

The bench stated the Maharashtra authorities had been proper in apprehending legislation and order issues following the couple’s public statements on reciting the Hanuman Chalisa at ‘Matoshree’.

“The FIRs show that these are two independent occurrences. The first incident, of the petitioners reaching Mumbai, saying they were going to recite on April 23 gave rise to the first FIR,” the HC stated.

“The second incident of resisting arrest gave rise to the second FIR under section 353. The occurrence of both events is at different times. They are independent of each other and not part of the same central event,” it stated.

Merchant argued that the Rana couple had been arrested on the mere apprehension that they might recite the Hanuman Chalisa.

“They (police) registered a specific offence solely as a result of PM Narendra Modi was visiting the city (on April 24) and so they thought there shall be a legislation and order scenario. But this programme was cancelled.

They finally publicly determined to drop the concept,” Merchant stated referring to the Rana couple withdrawing their plan to recite Hanuman Chalisa on Saturday, a day forward of the PM’s go to to Mumbai.

“Also, they never said they will recite it ‘at’ ‘Matoshree’. They said ‘outside’ Matoshree,” Merchant argued.”

The excessive courtroom, nevertheless, stated that cancelling the deliberate recitation “did not matter”.

SPP Gharat argued that the Ranas had been conscious that PM Modi was visiting Mumbai on April 24 and that their plan would trigger an “explosive situation” because the scenario was already tense over the difficulty of loudspeakers at mosques.

He additionally stated that the police had initially booked the Ranas solely on the cost of selling enmity.

But after chatting with witnesses and recording statements, the police realised that the recitation plan was a “cold and calculated move on their (Ranas) part to disturb the state government. Hence, the charge of sedition was added to the first FIR”.

The excessive courtroom stated the state authorities’s worry appeared justified.

“Such a declaration of the recitation at someone’s personal residence or even at a public place is certainly firstly the breach of the other person’s personal liberty (sic),” the HC stated.

“Secondly, the state is justified in its apprehension that such act of reciting religious verse at the CM’s private house would result in disturbance to law and order,” it stated.

“We made similar comments just two days back,” the excessive courtroom stated whereas referring to a listening to final week on Union minister Narayan Rane’s “slap” comment towards Uddhav Thackeray.

“But we’re pained to say that our phrases fell on deaf ears.

We realized that we can not anticipate something even from these occupying respectable posts ” the judges stated and dismissed the plea of the Ranas, saying that it was devoid of deserves.

“The second FIR pertains to a different set of events. These aren’t a sequel to the first set of events. These are two independent, different events and not part of the same series of events, we find no reason to grant relief,” the bench stated.

This just isn’t the MP-MLA couple’s first brush with controversy.

The Bombay excessive courtroom in June final 12 months cancelled the caste certificates issued to Navneet Kaur Rana, saying it was obtained fraudulently utilizing fabricated paperwork.

In January this 12 months, the Ranas had discovered themselves embroiled in one other authorized case, after Ravi Rana was booked for try to homicide over an assault on the Amravati municipal commissioner.