New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Oct 30, 2020-Friday
-°C

Humidity
-

Wind
-

Select Country
Select city
ADVERTISEMENT
Home / Chandigarh / High court dismisses plea seeking direction to Punjab Police to book Kangana for social media post

High court dismisses plea seeking direction to Punjab Police to book Kangana for social media post

Ludhiana resident claims actor hurt religious feelings by intentionally putting a post on social media to promote beef consumption

chandigarh Updated: Sep 18, 2020, 12:32 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
Hindustan Times, Chandigarh
The Punjab and Haryana high court on Thursday observed that actor Kangana Ranaut’s post does not suggest that it amounts to commission of an offence punishable under Section 295-A of the IPC.
The Punjab and Haryana high court on Thursday observed that actor Kangana Ranaut’s post does not suggest that it amounts to commission of an offence punishable under Section 295-A of the IPC.(Ht file photo)

The Punjab and Haryana high court has dismissed a plea seeking direction to Punjab Police for the registration of a criminal case against actor Kangana Ranaut for her alleged social media post on the promotion of beef consumption.

The plea was filed by a Ludhiana resident, Navneet Gopi, who had told the court that he had submitted a complaint to probe her social media posts. But Ludhiana police had not acted on the same. He claimed that he was being threatened by her supporters.

He said that she had outraged the religious feelings of a section of society by intentionally putting a post on social media to promote beef consumption.

He demanded the registration of an FIR against her under the Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, Sections 66 and 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 295-A Indian Penal Code, 1860 (deliberate act to hurt religious feelings).

The court on Thursday observed that her post does not prima facie suggest that it amounts to commission of an offence punishable under Section 295-A of the IPC, in any manner.

“On the contrary, the post describes the person as vegetarian, therefore, it cannot be construed at all, that it promotes consumption of beef much less by way of an advice,” the bench added.

As of threats to the petitioner, the court observed that it has not at all been described as to how and in what manner the alleged threat was extended to him. “The petition is vague and misconceived,” the bench said, dismissing it.

ht epaper

Sign In to continue reading